The more I learn about Compassion International's mission and philosophies the more I'm convinced that I've made the right move partnering with them. And one thing I heard on a training video that really stuck me was this statement: "Compassion believes that rarely do changed circumstances changes hearts, but changed hearts nearly always change circumstances." Eureka, thought I!
That one sentence sums up the fundamental difference between the "top down" and "bottom up" efforts to effect human change. Beginning in the 1960s we set out to wage a "war on poverty" here in the United States. Lyndon Johnson set in motion a whole bundle of programs and agencies designed to eradicate both urban and rural poverty right here in our own backyard. Welfare, The Department of Housing and Urban Development, the food stamp program, W.I.C., and many other "ABC" departments were created and went right to work on "top down" projects in nearly every city in the country. It was thought that if the poor were relieved of the constant pressure of their hand to mouth conditions that they would then be at liberty move forward and upward toward prosperity. A laudable goal, to be sure!
But sadly forty plus years and untold trillions of dollars in we can see that this approach didn't work. Not only was what we call poverty in this country not eradicated, but it seems to have only grown in depth and breadth - exponentially. There are gains that have been realized. For example, without a doubt programs that feed those in need have created a circumstance where rarely is any child in need in the U.S. without potential resources. This is good. And true homelessness, though given a great deal of exposure in the press, is a rarity. Also good! But for every positive in this situation the negatives are legion.
For me the most glaring example of the failure of "top down" programs was the Cabrini Green housing development in Chicago. Hailed as a triumph before even the first spade of earth was turned, Cabrini Green was to have been a symbol of hope for all of Chicago's poor. Decent housing was to become a reality for thousands, so blocks of sub-standard, slum housing were razed and soon the towers soared above the neighborhood.
But in short order the cracks in the "top down" logic began to show. Vandalism took a quick toll on the aesthetic value of the property. And the criminal element never so much as momentarily hesitated to venture into the supposedly enlightened confines of the project. And as the years wore on the problems only multiplied, hardened, and metastasized.
End the end this monument to America's commitment to the war on poverty had become a symbol of degradation, urban crime, municipal neglect, rot, and failure. Cabrini had become the most dangerous neighborhood in Chicago, if not the country. It had become uninhabitable. The last of the buildings was torn down in 2011. Not a stone remains of the dream of Cabrini Green.*
"Rarely do changed circumstances change hearts,"
Now let's look at a "bottom up" approach. It's Compassion's view that only by truly changing hearts can the cycle of poverty be broken. Understand that along with the physical poverty of hunger, need for clothing, shelter, medical care, etc lies a deeper form of poverty - the poverty of the heart.
I'm talking about the internalized hopelessness that can overcome a child raised in these circumstances. The loss of any hope (and perhaps even knowledge) that there could be anything better for that child beyond the want, death, and violence into which they were born. And this is tragic. It's the loss of a person. Hope, you see, is the lifeblood of the soul.
But one thing all parents understand is that there is time in a child's life when they are pure and innocent and even joyful almost irregardless of what's going on around them. And if a child can be reached during that critical window of opportunity, her destiny can be changed. A hope can be planted that won't be extinguished.
Which is where Compassion comes in. For the past 60 years Compassion has been in the mission field working diligently to reach those precious hearts and change the story for millions of children - one willing sponsor/one child at a time. In Jesus' name. They now operate in twenty-six countries world wide by partnering with local churches in the areas served. In fact, they only work with the church because Compassion believes that the church is the only institution set forth by God to complete his work on Earth. So rather than compete with them, they partner with and strengthen them.
And it's within the walls of these church run school projects that Compassion children can find hope. A sponsored child will receive an education, nourishing meals (and what a load off of the shoulders of a parent struggling to feed several children on $1 a day that must be!), medical care, clothing and school supplies. And most importantly of all, they will learn about our Savior. As Christians we understand that the child who grows up without knowledge of Jesus is in possession of the most impoverished heart of all.
If a child shows talent and potential they may advance to the university via Compassion's Leadership Development Program. And if a child needs life-saving heart surgery there's a fund for that. Today Compassion even begins it's relationship with children while they're still in the womb through it's Child Survival Program. And by answering Christ's call to care for the "least of these" Compassion's "bottom up" approach gets results.
Imagine that a charities resources were used to build a school building. Yes, it would be a positive good. But it's only a building after all, and in time it will begin to crumble. Furthermore, if the local community failed to feel any sense of "ownership" towards it it may very well become a target of vandals and thieves. Under the best of circumstances the building would only have a useful life span of a few decades.
Now imagine that the same resources were "child based", as are Compassion's, and spent directly for the benefit of the children in need. No new building is erected (although it might be) because the existing local church runs the school. The child will find himself fed, clothed, educated, and loved. Loved by a Christian sponsor in some far away land. He understands Christ's love deeply as a direct recipient of the outpouring of that love, and, hopefully, he will come to accept him as his savior. And he begins to see a world beyond his own. He receives encouragement and is given the tools to raise himself up. In the end you'll most likely end up with a confident, educated, empowered, Christian adult.
Further imagine that he marries a Christian woman and they start a family. Now multiply that couple several times according to the number of sponsored children in that community - can you see where this is going? You now have Christian families, prospering ,hopefully, where before only hopelessness lived. Men and women who now have the tools to make a decent living, the health the exploit that opportunity, and a strong spiritual and moral backbone.
Which of these two scenarios would you imagine to have the most long lasting impact on an impoverished village?
"...but changed hearts almost always change circumstances."
That one sentence sums up the fundamental difference between the "top down" and "bottom up" efforts to effect human change. Beginning in the 1960s we set out to wage a "war on poverty" here in the United States. Lyndon Johnson set in motion a whole bundle of programs and agencies designed to eradicate both urban and rural poverty right here in our own backyard. Welfare, The Department of Housing and Urban Development, the food stamp program, W.I.C., and many other "ABC" departments were created and went right to work on "top down" projects in nearly every city in the country. It was thought that if the poor were relieved of the constant pressure of their hand to mouth conditions that they would then be at liberty move forward and upward toward prosperity. A laudable goal, to be sure!
But sadly forty plus years and untold trillions of dollars in we can see that this approach didn't work. Not only was what we call poverty in this country not eradicated, but it seems to have only grown in depth and breadth - exponentially. There are gains that have been realized. For example, without a doubt programs that feed those in need have created a circumstance where rarely is any child in need in the U.S. without potential resources. This is good. And true homelessness, though given a great deal of exposure in the press, is a rarity. Also good! But for every positive in this situation the negatives are legion.
For me the most glaring example of the failure of "top down" programs was the Cabrini Green housing development in Chicago. Hailed as a triumph before even the first spade of earth was turned, Cabrini Green was to have been a symbol of hope for all of Chicago's poor. Decent housing was to become a reality for thousands, so blocks of sub-standard, slum housing were razed and soon the towers soared above the neighborhood.
But in short order the cracks in the "top down" logic began to show. Vandalism took a quick toll on the aesthetic value of the property. And the criminal element never so much as momentarily hesitated to venture into the supposedly enlightened confines of the project. And as the years wore on the problems only multiplied, hardened, and metastasized.
End the end this monument to America's commitment to the war on poverty had become a symbol of degradation, urban crime, municipal neglect, rot, and failure. Cabrini had become the most dangerous neighborhood in Chicago, if not the country. It had become uninhabitable. The last of the buildings was torn down in 2011. Not a stone remains of the dream of Cabrini Green.*
"Rarely do changed circumstances change hearts,"
Now let's look at a "bottom up" approach. It's Compassion's view that only by truly changing hearts can the cycle of poverty be broken. Understand that along with the physical poverty of hunger, need for clothing, shelter, medical care, etc lies a deeper form of poverty - the poverty of the heart.
I'm talking about the internalized hopelessness that can overcome a child raised in these circumstances. The loss of any hope (and perhaps even knowledge) that there could be anything better for that child beyond the want, death, and violence into which they were born. And this is tragic. It's the loss of a person. Hope, you see, is the lifeblood of the soul.
But one thing all parents understand is that there is time in a child's life when they are pure and innocent and even joyful almost irregardless of what's going on around them. And if a child can be reached during that critical window of opportunity, her destiny can be changed. A hope can be planted that won't be extinguished.
Which is where Compassion comes in. For the past 60 years Compassion has been in the mission field working diligently to reach those precious hearts and change the story for millions of children - one willing sponsor/one child at a time. In Jesus' name. They now operate in twenty-six countries world wide by partnering with local churches in the areas served. In fact, they only work with the church because Compassion believes that the church is the only institution set forth by God to complete his work on Earth. So rather than compete with them, they partner with and strengthen them.
And it's within the walls of these church run school projects that Compassion children can find hope. A sponsored child will receive an education, nourishing meals (and what a load off of the shoulders of a parent struggling to feed several children on $1 a day that must be!), medical care, clothing and school supplies. And most importantly of all, they will learn about our Savior. As Christians we understand that the child who grows up without knowledge of Jesus is in possession of the most impoverished heart of all.
If a child shows talent and potential they may advance to the university via Compassion's Leadership Development Program. And if a child needs life-saving heart surgery there's a fund for that. Today Compassion even begins it's relationship with children while they're still in the womb through it's Child Survival Program. And by answering Christ's call to care for the "least of these" Compassion's "bottom up" approach gets results.
Imagine that a charities resources were used to build a school building. Yes, it would be a positive good. But it's only a building after all, and in time it will begin to crumble. Furthermore, if the local community failed to feel any sense of "ownership" towards it it may very well become a target of vandals and thieves. Under the best of circumstances the building would only have a useful life span of a few decades.
Now imagine that the same resources were "child based", as are Compassion's, and spent directly for the benefit of the children in need. No new building is erected (although it might be) because the existing local church runs the school. The child will find himself fed, clothed, educated, and loved. Loved by a Christian sponsor in some far away land. He understands Christ's love deeply as a direct recipient of the outpouring of that love, and, hopefully, he will come to accept him as his savior. And he begins to see a world beyond his own. He receives encouragement and is given the tools to raise himself up. In the end you'll most likely end up with a confident, educated, empowered, Christian adult.
Further imagine that he marries a Christian woman and they start a family. Now multiply that couple several times according to the number of sponsored children in that community - can you see where this is going? You now have Christian families, prospering ,hopefully, where before only hopelessness lived. Men and women who now have the tools to make a decent living, the health the exploit that opportunity, and a strong spiritual and moral backbone.
Which of these two scenarios would you imagine to have the most long lasting impact on an impoverished village?
"...but changed hearts almost always change circumstances."
No comments:
Post a Comment