Who says Christians don't care about the poor?

Brian's assertion (another generalization) that "the very essence of being a religious charity is to actively engage in the advancement of religion" is countered, again, by a host of specific examples. Brazilian Archbishop Dom Helder Camara, for instance, was widely known for both his social work and political advocacy for the poor, and was an advocate for human rights and democracy under Brazil's military regime. He is famous for having said: "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a communist." Another example is the aforementioned El Salvadoran Archbishop Oscar Romero, whose outspoken advocacy for the poor and oppressed cost him his life. To accuse such heroic champions of the poor of caring only about advancing religion is not only ignorant but profoundly insulting.

Then there's the case of Millard Fuller, who founded Habitat for Humanity after his Christian conversion. Today Habitat enlists thousands of volunteers to build houses for the poor all over the world. In relation to Brian Morris's assertion that religious charities are only in it for the advancement of religion, Fuller said this: "We don't try to evangelize. You don't have to be a Christian to live in one of our houses, or to help us build one. But the fact is, the reason I do what I do, and so many of our volunteers do what they do, is that we're being obedient to Jesus." And countless other faith-inspired servants to the poor would say likewise.

Such cases torpedo Brian's baseless assertion that "the churches have departed from the alleged teachings of Jesus to give succour and comfort to the needy without counting the cost." The reality is that for many, the cost has been their very lives. One such case is that of Australian missionary-martyr Graham Staines, who spent 34 years giving succour and comfort to leprosy sufferers in India, before being burnt alive (along with his two young sons) by Hindu extremists in 1999.

As Andrew Bolt (who is not a Christian) wrote in the Herald Sun a few days after the tragedy, "It is dishonourable to suggest that Graham Staines just wanted to bash heathens with Bibles, or to ram God down Hindu throats. Rather, he wanted the people he served to see God's truth through his exemplary life. So he built homes for lepers, and helped the poor tribal people of Orissa. He was widely admired for his work, and India's president called him a role model." His widow Gladys was equally inspiring, deciding to stay on in India after her terrible loss, to continue the work among leprosy sufferers.

Famous English journalist and broadcaster Malcolm Muggeridge once said that he knew of many Christian leprosy missions, but had never heard of a single atheistic one. Which raises the broader question of what and where are the corresponding atheistic equivalents to the vast array of faith-based agencies and individuals such as those mentioned above?

When I looked up "secularist organizations" on the internet, I found there are four main ones in Australia: the Atheist Foundation of Australia, the Rationalist Society of Australia, the Secular Party of Australia, and the Council of Australian Humanist Societies. I will need to do further digging to discover the various works of sacrificial service to the poor and marginalized, and compassionate care of the hungry and homeless, that these societies are undoubtedly performing throughout Australia and beyond.

Brian asserts, without naming any source, that 63% of charities are "primarily secular" (whatever "primarily" may mean), and 37% are "religious". That's a ratio of almost two to one. In this article I've alluded to at least 40 faith-based organizations and individuals which/who have provided, or are providing, outstanding aid and advocacy for the poor and oppressed. And the list is nowhere near exhaustive. In stark contrast, Brian, in the 33 paragraphs of his article, provided not one single example from his "63%" of secularist or atheistic agencies. If the ratio is two to one, it should be no trouble for Brian to whip up about 80 such agencies that are providing the same sort of devoted service to the poor, the outcast and the dispossessed as the faith-based ones are providing.

And please note: I'm not asking for the names of highly commendable humanitarian organizations like UNICEF, Oxfam, Save the Children, Care Australia and the like. Rather, I'm looking for non-government charities that have been inspired by atheism, rationalism, nihilistic secularism and/or anti-Christian humanism, in the same way that faith-based agencies have been inspired by the Christian faith, its truths and teachings, and the life and example of its Founder.

Speaking of whom, one wonders if there has ever been any atheistic historical figure who has come even remotely close to having the immeasurably beneficial effect on the welfare of humankind as has the carpenter's son from Nazareth, whom The Age described in an editorial (24/12) as a "kind, gentle activist" - one whose life divided human history into Before and After, and one whose enduring influence has inspired the compassionate enterprises and individuals mentioned above, and so many more besides.