Jeremy Gregg raises money for Central Dallas Ministries. In a recent post he reacts, with both respect and some incredulity, to the speech given here in Dallas by Charles Collier, Senior Philanthropic Advisor at Harvard, the gist of which is that eliciting big gifts is all about the wealthy donor, the donor's family dynamics, the donor's virtues and wisdom, the donor's troubled mind, the donor's legacy or dynastic ambitions. Throughout the talk I was wondering, why Harvard, Charlie? Why religious and arts organizations? All about me is not how a liberal arts grad or follower of Christ should think. Egotism is a failing - even in America, even for Harvard Alums. If our wealthiest citizens expect our solicitude, if they expect that the biggest problem on our minds as fellow citizens is preserving their dynastic wealth, or passing on their values, whatever those values might be, we are as a society basically screwed. From the leader of Central Dallas Ministries, Larry James, comes these photos from inner city Dallas. So when a donor gives to Dallas Central Ministries who is it all about? Larry asks that himself sometimes and concludes, "We are all in it together." A donor who believes that is a better person than one who believes that family dynasty is the highest ideal. (How do I know? The Bible tells me so; and Dallas, this is Bible Country. Your own damn God said. That is how I know.)
Post a comment
Your Information
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
In every big city there are a few people like Larry and many kids like the one's Larry seeks to help in Dallas. Because of the way philanthropy works, a few organizations are able to find donors who will support their efforts. Most struggle to find these donors consistently. Many neighborhoods don't have programs that help the kids.
Until we can more find donors who want to use their money to help kids grow up, rather than put their names on more buildings at some university or hospital, the Larrys of the world are going to struggle, and that means very few of the kids they are trying to help will ever get a chance for college or a career.
Thanks Phil for writing about Larry. It connects us via the Internet. Maybe that's one step toward creating greater visibility, and attracting some of these donors, who want to same results, to reach out to support the Larrys in every city.
Posted by: Dan Bassill | May 06, 2007 at 10:36 PM
Thanks, Dan. Forging connections on link at a time.
Posted by: Phil | May 06, 2007 at 11:05 PM
Why should it be up to the Larrys of the world to help poor kids? Why isn't this a shared (meaning, a public) responsibility?
Posted by: Albert Ruesga | May 07, 2007 at 09:43 AM
You mean tax and spend liberalism? A social contract to redistribute wealth? Sounds like Rawls and The Great Society.
Posted by: Phil | May 07, 2007 at 12:07 PM
Something like that. It's not my treasure that sustains me, but the fact that all of us -- rich and poor -- agree not to rebel too vigorously against the structures, habits of mind, etc. that sustain our positions in the world relative to the real or imagined slobs even lower than us in the food chain. As for the dynastically wealthy: they have all the wealth and power, but damn it, we’ve read all the great books.
Posted by: Stuart Johnson | May 07, 2007 at 09:28 PM
Maybe that is how we qualify as Fools on retainer to Leading Families of Wealth?
Posted by: Phil | May 08, 2007 at 08:26 AM