Diana S. Newman’s Opening Doors: Pathways to Diverse Donors is neither an expressly Christian book nor a text intentionally oriented toward Transformational Giving (TG). But it has to be among the most helpful books for TG practitioners to read as we attempt to reset our brains with definitions of philanthropy and generosity that take us beyond standard traditional/transaction fundraising (ttf) fare.

Newman draws a distinction between institutional philanthropy (which she defines as ‘philanthropy governed by an organization’s formal policies and procedures’) and personal philanthropy (which consists of ‘the charitable activities of individuals in direct response to immediate needs’). She notes that when most people think of giving and donations and philanthropy, they’re thinking of ‘relatively wealthy individuals giving gifts of money to favored nonprofit institutions (in which they often serve as board members or advisors)’.

Hard to get more ttf than that.

And, sadly, this sometimes causes philanthropic experts to opine about cultures that have no traditions of philanthropy. Erk.

To the contrary, Newman identifies the vibrant traditions of personal philanthropy that remain strongly evident in non-majority ethnic populations today.

James Joseph, former president of the Council on Foundations, writes that in the annals of American philanthropy, ‘the real heroes were the ordinary people who, with meager resources, accomplished extraordinary deeds. Mired in poverty, racked by frequent epidemics, and oppressed by vicious racism, the poor reached out to the poor, sharing what little they had with each other’.

(I fancy a Hebrews 11 echo in there.)

More gold from Newman:

‘Philanthropy in the Native sense means the tradition of sharing and honoring’, writes Rebecca Adamson, president of First Nations Development Institute, ‘which is generally not a question of altruism or charity but of mutual responsibility. In this worldview, both giver and recipient benefit from the gift [emphasis mine, as I happily note the resonance with this previous post on Korea].

Think of it like this:

What would a tradition of philanthropy and generosity look like in a culture that did not predicate philanthropy and generosity as a function of disposable income?

We’d almost be on biblical footing if we could take that fork in the road. And many non-majority ethnic populations provide us with the opportunity to take that fork, since they embody robust traditions of personal philanthropy that are different not only in degree but in kind from our majority philanthropic traditions.

(And lest we protest that ttf predicates philantropy and generosity this way, let’s recall how ttf is oriented toward institutional philanthropy and thus ranks donors on the basis of their capacity, recency, frequency, personal assets, corporate assets, and all things green. And–dare I say it? I haven’t seen a whole lot of the poorest 20% of the US public in the Christian ‘stewardship’ gatherings either, despite the fact as we established yesterday that they’re already twice as far along the path to generous giving as their wealthy counterparts…)

Tomorrow: An ethnic PEO chart from a 1999 Council of Foundations presentation by an Asian American fundraiser gives us new insight into Participation, Engagement, and Ownership.