Is there a place for religious international NGOs in the 21st century? The majority of students who responded to our question said yes. They argued that religion was deeply rooted in many communities, and therefore it made sense for faith-based NGOs to work in those communities. Those who disagreed claimed religious NGOs attempt to convert the people they work with. Here are five of our favourite responses, and you can add your thoughts in the comments section below.
Religion has spearheaded social change
Yes. Religious NGOs play an important role as social service providers, and through their faith-based approach they have the ability to develop deeper relationships with communities in developing countries. Wendy Tyndale, in her 2003 analysis of a World Bank survey that collected voices from around the world, found that “no other organisations are more firmly rooted or have better networks in poor communities than the religious ones”. This ability to foster deep connections in communities cannot be overlooked.
Yes, religion has in some cases led to extremism, but it also has spearheaded social change. For example, much of Latin America (where Christianity and notably Catholicism has had tremendous influence) has undergone rapid social changes with a view to the oppressed and impoverished through liberation theology. Liberation theology has its roots in Latin America and understands Christianity to operate with a “preferential option for the poor”. This change in theological understanding has brought the plight of the marginalised to the foreground.
Religious NGOs continue to have this ability to fight for the marginalised and combat extremism through representing different faiths under the golden rule of all religions: “Do unto others as you would have them to do unto you.” Religious NGOs need to continually reflect this and, if done faithfully, their ability to connect with communities and promote a positive message for the religious may be the best way in which to combat extremism and advocate for positive social change.
Adam Faber, Dalhousie University, Canada
Only secular NGOs can claim to be independent
The complementary role that NGOs have in supporting and advancing development efforts is widely recognised, as assistance from locally based organisations and NGOs are given the difficult task of addressing poverty alleviation, social inequities and environmentally focused initiatives where governments’ and the private sector’s actions are simply falling short.
However, religious NGOs (especially evangelical Christian) are often a remnant of western colonialism and imperialism, as the primary goals of economic and political exploitation are pursued through manipulating attempts of conversion of faith. By entering a community and establishing a powerful base of converts, there is the potential to influence the educational system, economic activities, social policy, government bureaucracy, and even military affairs.
Of course, there are a plethora of examples where religious NGOs have accomplished fulfilling noble projects of improving human wellbeing, but the underlying foundational concept of converting the population to a given faith cannot be ignored. Such initiatives are nothing less than subversive tactics with the intention of changing cultures and communities to subscribe to a foreign ideology, so that ulterior economic and political motives may be pursued.
With the growing trend of religious fanaticism across a variety of faiths, to continue to promote the presence of religious NGOs in areas of potential religiously influenced conflict is to stoke an age-old battle of domineering dogmas. Therefore, if a humanitarian worker truly wishes to remain independent, then he or she must choose to work with a secular organisation. Otherwise, there will be undeniable pressure to persuade vulnerable people to convert.
Patrick Rulong, University of Waterloo, Canada
Faith-based NGOs attract more donations
Faith is a phenomenon that has shaped and molded the sociopolitical landscape for millennia. No other phenomena can illicit as big a response from a group as large and diverse and as quickly as faith can. This has had extremely ugly and devastating consequences as well as significant humanitarian benefits in modern history. In the context of humanitarian organisations, faith has been a double-edged sword. Often, faith-based humanitarian organisations have used aid as a pretext for spreading their faith, resulting in controversial programmes in which individuals are not given aid until they convert, as has been done by several controversial evangelical missionary organisations in Africa. This results in faith-based organisations being used as tools to establish cultural and religious imperialism. Furthermore, the bad actions of a few faith-based organisations causes deep mistrust and resentment by the local population that is sometimes vented indiscriminately at foreign aid organisations, as has been the case in Afghanistan and Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.
However, in the modern era, many secular aid organisations such as USAid can be accused of similar corruption in goals as governments such as the United States government use them as tools of diplomacy and intelligence rather than for the intended goal of humanitarian aid. The US Central Intelligence Agency has been accused of using humanitarian organistions and programmes as fronts for its intelligence operations. This came into light when a fake hepatitis B vaccination programme in Pakistan was used to identify the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden.
In short, in the large pool of humanitarian organisations there will always be bad apples with corrupted goals, whether they be evangelical missionary organisations with the goal of religious conversion or western governmental aid agencies with the goal of serving the diplomatic and intelligence goals of their government. This will remain true regardless of whether organisations are faith-based or secular.
The key difference between secular and faith-based organisations is their ability to attract donors. While, in recent decades, secular humanitarian organisations have drastically increased their donor pools and funding resources, they cannot match the donations that faith-based organisations are able to procure speedily. Often, significant amounts of money donated to secular organizations are given by numerous small faith-based ones. The fact that charity is an important tenet in religions such as Islam and Christianity is a driving factor that causes individuals who would otherwise be apathetic to global humanitarian issues to donate to help solve such issues. In a world where individuals are increasingly apathetic about global humanitarian issues, faith-based organisations will have a much easier time fundraising for global causes than their secular counterparts. It is this key ability of faith-based organisations that makes them not only tolerable but necessary in the coming decades.
Noorsher Ahmed, Occidental College, US
Religious or secular – they both do inspiring work
Though some may feel that religious belief is a now defunct reasoning behind “good works”, no one can deny the massive impact it has had across the world over the centuries. I support the work of both religious and secular NGOs and I applaud the very difficult work these organisations do. The dangers faced by aid workers are similar, whether or not they are working with a religious group.
Although religious groups take different ethical and moral stances on issues such as sexuality, this should not (and, I believe, usually does not) prevent them from offering aid to all in need. Working in communities alongside different religions is a challenge, but an extremely rewarding one, and it can lead to greater understanding and increased trust between people. The world stage is now so crowded and wide that it is only necessary that we each learn about the other’s beliefs, while figuring out how to work alongside one another despite our differences. As a Christian and a medical student, I am very interested in becoming more involved in humanitarian work in the future. Whether this is with a faith-based organisation or a secular one, I know I will be doing my work with the same goals in mind: first, to love my God “with all my heart and soul and mind” and, second, to “love my neighbour as myself” (Matthew 22:37-40).
Sophie Gerring, University of Aberdeen, Scotland
Religious NGOs are fine, as long as they do no harm
This is an issue that we should regard from a pragmatist perspective. There are about a million difficulties that an aid worker can encounter when working in a cultural environment that is different from their own, from problems with language to accidentally offending people because customs are not known. This is not limited to faith-based NGOs, and in most cases the development work the NGO does makes up for the trouble it creates. It only becomes a real problem when they do more harm than good.
But if it turns out that an NGO does create an unacceptable amount of damage in a certain area, for example, an NGO discourages the use of condoms in a place where HIV is the main cause of death, it should get out. Not because it is faith-based, but because it does more harm than good. We cannot judge religious NGOs as a matter of principle; their effectiveness needs to be viewed on a case-by-case basis.
The only thing we can regard as a matter of principle is that we should not ban religion-based NGOs from places where people practise a different religion from their own. We do not want to impair people who want to do good because they have a religious reason for wanting to do so. This, in a way, would also be doing more harm than good because aid is denied where it could had been given. We need to have faith in religious NGOs.
Kim van Winkel, King’s College London, United Kingdom
Over to you – let us know your thoughts on religion and development in the comment section below. You can also enter this month’s Students Speak challenge, which asks: “Is social media still a campaigner’s best friend?”
Свежие комментарии