Lupton's critique of charitable giving sounds good, but I have a few points to raise. First, does the book provide any scriptural support for his ideas? Ms. Sherman does not tell us. Second, to say that often people's philosophy and practice of charity are frequently misguided is to state the obvious. However, there are enough examples of those who get it right to demonstrate that dignified compassion is alive and well. Third, the relentless attack on short-term missions is, in my view, unwarranted. Spending good money to take young people on a joy ride deserves to be criticized, however most sending agencies make sure that recipients are truly served while those who serve have a life-building experience. And third, it would be nice if those who criticize do so with a bit more charity? Terms like 'Compassion Industry', 'Toxic Charity' etc. may represent a few without speaking meaningfully of the well-intentioned. Maybe Lupton should take his own advice and above all "do no harm'.

We are instructed Biblically to share our resources (not just the extra) with the poor, distressed, alien, widow, orphan, etc. If they are God's concern, they must be our concern. Having worked for a faith-based NGO for many years, I saw that money is many times the bottom line. Charity Navigator doesn't investigate, but rather reports the information that is turned in. Those organizations that collect "Gifts in Kind (GIK), use the value of the donated resources as income to offset fund raising. Take away those donated resources and many times you'll find the administration fee ratio to be 50% rather than 10% or less. In addition, there are organizations that fold their fund raising efforts into "communications" or "advocacy" rather than what it really is. People should be concerned with how and where their funds are spent and that there is really progress.

I read in the Bible that farmers left some grain in their fields to be gleaned by the poor. Notice that the poor had to WORK. They had to go out and work by hand in the fields to get the grain. They did not ask the farmer to do the work for them and give him an address where he could ship the grain when he was done. This kind of mutuality is what Lupton seems to be advocating. His critics need to let us know where in the Bible we are told to avoid mutual work in favor of handouts. As for the commenter who wondered where we are told to avoid creating dependency, it is called the Golden Rule and goes back to Leviticus 19:18. Do you want someone to help you become self-sufficient, or to make you dependent on them for the rest of your life? If you prefer the former, then the Golden Rule mandates that your charity be in accordance.

charitynavigator.org gives good information that can help people know where their donations will do the most good.

I'd be very cautious in interpreting Lupton's suggestions. It seems that the author is coming from the perspective of Friedman more than the scriptures. For evangelical Christians who seek the guidance of scripture first, we should remember that the Bible's teaching is clear that compassion and charity do not come with qualifications about effectiveness/toxicity. I don't remember anywhere in the gospels where Jesus cautions us about the cycles of dependency that come from charitable giving. Rather, the Bible seems to advocate a reckless giving. I fear that Lupton is more interested in preserving free-market ideology than presenting a Biblical paradigm for serving the poor.