We've supported children through CCF for some time. Indeed, on a couple of business trips to India, I was able to meet with one child - which was wonderful. Sad to say, though, the organization decided to change its name to Child Fund International: 'Christian' has gone. I have some sympathy with their decision because one project in Indonesia, where we were supporting a child, had to be shut down because local Muslims were suspicious of 'Christian' in the name of the charity. Still, 70 years of tradition just ended, and I'm thinking seriously about switching support to organizations that have retained their Christian roots. We won't, however, abandon the children we currently support. A sign of the times, maybe.
Maybe a sign of the times but it is sad and very telling of where your world is headed. Come quickly, Lord Jesus.
Isn't it so sad? Our country was founded on God and faith. Now people just want to deny him and abolish anything to do with him!
Wait a minute... They are still saving and improving the lives of children around the world. They simply made a name change that will enable them to do that safer and more effectively. How the heck does that constitute denying Christ or turning away from Christian roots? They are still doing the work of God. Does "Christian" need to be on the letter head for us to recognize it as such?
If their name had been Child Fund International from the start, I agree - it's not an issue. There are many wonderful and worthwhile charities out there. Personally, though, I like the children I sponsor to know why I'm helping, and retaining 'Christian' in the charity's title allows me to do that. For others, the change of name will not be an issue; for me, it's not a show-stopper issue but it's certainly a disappointment - and it will cause me to consider whether I should support other groups instead. Some people and organizations in this world are beginning to see the term 'Christian' as a liability. I'm not one of them, and it's such a shame to see 70 years of history go down the tubes because of, most likely, social pressure. UNCF and NAACP include names that really are anachronistic, yet they retain them because of a proud history. I don't see the difference here.
I agree. There is nothing wrong with NOT having Christian in their name. But I see problems with REMOVING it. They have had it in their name up until now.
Welcome to the world of altruism, it thrives on emotion and pride. When you strip away part of that (in this case the christian pride that goes along with the charity's name) it looses support. The organization betrayed their pride by attempting to be more expedient.
I agree. I also say that if their mission of spreading the gospel of these kids has been hampered then I would also be very saddened. I would now not support this charity...but like Steve, I would continue with my commitment if I already had one. I don't need to provide food and shelter if the child grows up and is deprived of the bread of life and the shelter of God's love. (ok that sounded corny but it was better than me saying what I was thinking and that was for the kid to end up in Hell anyway.) Have fun with that, Dawn! LOL.
My mind is going in two different directions on this one.:? Is it strictly the name that is changing or is the whole "70 year tradition" changing? Meaning, are they no longer going to share the message of Christ or did they change the name as a guise but intend on keeping the old principle in order to maintain there ministry without too much government interference? If they are completely turning their backs on the ministry, then shame on them and I wouldn't blame you for not funding them anymore, with the exception of the little tots you are already helping. I agree with you. This is a sign of the times no matter why this was done. I also believe that we will see more of this; assuming it is just a guise especially as more pressures are placed upon the church by worldy influences.
We support a child in India as well. It's an organization through our world-wide church, and is still going strong. I hope it continues to be able to reach out and help these children! I know that some companies are not allowed to operate in certain countries if their name includes "Christian" in some form. In that case, they're changing their name so they CAN still help those children, since they would be shut down and not be able to continue their support otherwise! That may not be the case, but it's a possibility! In that case I would think they're doing what they have to do to continue to help those children, so I would definitely still support them!!
Yes, I would continue to support or even begin to support if only the name changed and NOT the message or purpose.
