What drives people of faith to give anonymously, or not?

Article content

Putting a name to a substantial charitable donation can be a daunting decision, depending on the philanthropist’s personal agenda, how it impacts his or her family, the cause itself, and the financial risks involved.

For people of faith, the decision takes on another dimension, and discussions around funding notable causes also involve a religious creed.

Here, three people of faith who are philanthropic consultants within the Muslim, Jewish and Christian communities share what personal reflections are involved when people considering large donations also seek answers from a higher power.

Muslim philanthropists

Irshad Osman, Principal Consultant, Zimmr Fundraising Consultancy

“In Islam, philanthropy is intrinsically connected to spirituality. The time of giving, the method of giving, the rewards of giving, as well as the recipients of donations are well defined and divinely mandated. The benefits a donor would receive in this world and in the Hereafter are explained in numerous traditions and textual sources. These are the theological motivations we use as Imams and community fundraisers to influence people to give.

And there are strong deterrents in Islam for expecting anything in return for generosity. This includes public praise, validation or preferential treatment. The deterrents talk about donor feelings as well. So Muslim donors are afraid that pride, arrogance, haughtiness, etc., would creep into their giving and spoil the sincere intention. Hence, they prefer to remain anonymous. That ‘left hand, right hand’ tradition is widely followed in the Muslim community.

An example is … millions of dollars are raised by the Muslim community [for building mosques]. Yet, you can’t see a single name plaque in the any of the mosques. Except the Imam and the mosque administration, no one would know who supported those building projects.

Another example is international relief organizations receive a large percentage of substantial philanthropic gifts. Yet, there are no donor walls nor public recognition of individual donors in their annual reports. One reason could be that they don’t like to share their donor base with other organizations. Other reason is donors themselves like to remain anonymous.

Although anonymity is the default mode in Muslim giving, there are two exceptions. One is from the tradition, and the other is shaped by the current climate.

One of the famous sayings of the Prophet Muhammad is, “Whoever guides to a good deed gets the same reward as the doer of that deed.” So, to encourage and inspire others to give, you can see wealthy donors put up their hands with their large gift amounts during a live fundraising setting in the mosque and during community fundraising events. Usually, we the fundraisers begin the ask from the big amount. So, the one who starts off the fundraiser with his own gift gets the reward of the entire amount raised during that session. Yet, the same donors would never disclose or discuss their gift outside that event. In a mosque setting, they may not even receive a thank you letter, although there is nothing wrong in formally acknowledging that gift.

And in the current climate, the approach of Muslim giving has been changing in a minority setting, especially in the Western post-9/11 context. When their loyalty and local engagement are questioned, Muslims are encouraged by their leadership to publicly display their giving. This is manifested primarily in two ways while still holding on to the spiritual aspects, with “semi-anonymous” giving: Individual donations – we know the donor’s name; but not the gift amount; and collective donations – the community as a whole rallies to support a local cause.

Of course, there are exceptions to this anonymity. But these are very few at this moment. It may change in the future as the community grows and their needs and the current climate also change.

I used to fundraise in a majority Muslim country. We would receive substantial gifts from individual donors. Sometimes in millions in unsolicited gifts. When issuing the receipts, they would instruct us to write words that mean the equivalent of do-gooder, benefactor, almsgiver, well-doer, etc. [instead of their names].”

Jewish philanthropists

Ann Rosenfield, Principal, Charitably Speaking

“The reasons people give to charity are many. Depending on the reason, a person may choose to be anonymous or want to have their name recognized.

Anonymous giving is valued in Jewish tradition. The 12th-century thinker, Moses Maimonides, developed a hierarchy of giving known as the Maimonides Ladder. According to him, one of the highest ways of giving is when the donor is anonymous, and the recipient is anonymous. A modern-day example of this would be a community food pantry in a public location where you can place something in the pantry or take what you need. The pantry is not monitored so the donor and the recipient are not connected.

While there is a strong value put on anonymous giving in Judaism, there are many situations where a Jewish donor may choose to have their name recognized. Specifically, Canada was not always welcoming to Jews. Many donors of my parents’ or grandparents’ generation would give using their names as a way of showing their love and loyalty to Canada. Today, donors often give publicly to set an example to their friends and colleagues to spur larger gifts.

There are other reasons to give and not be anonymous. There is a very strong cultural practice in Judaism of making a gift in memory of someone when they die. These gifts include the donor’s names. The purpose of a gift in memory is to comfort the family and other loved ones of the deceased. If you read a Jewish obituary in a mainstream newspaper, you will usually see ‘in lieu of flowers, please make a donation to charity.’

Similarly, children will make a named donation in honour of a parent on the anniversary of a parent’s death. Some donors may make a major gift to honour their deceased parents’ legacy and use both their name and the name of the parents. This is connected to the Biblical commandment to honour father and mother.

Finally, there are a host of reasons why people may choose to be anonymous that have nothing to do with faith – the Getty case years ago where publicity around a large donation led to the kidnapping of a family member has led some donors to have safety concerns around large gifts.”

Christian philanthropists

Lori Guenther Reesor, an author, speaker, coach, consultant to Christian donors

“I wish this was a straightforward question. Christians give in grateful obedience to a generous God. They might attach their name to their gift in one context and not in another. Donors with their names on a hospital building would be public givers in that setting, and yet only the church treasurer knows how much they give to the church. Or if they give to the church, as secrecy around giving is the norm for many churches, often the pastor (or minister, or clergy) doesn’t know who gives. Church donors might get an annual receipt without even a thank-you note.

In simplest terms, a person choosing to remain anonymous wants to honour God with their giving. They don’t need recognition to accomplish this. If it’s between them and God, why go public? I’ve heard donors express concern that recognition might turn their generosity into something transactional, an exchange of money for public praise.

Christian theology teaches proportional giving. Jesus commends the widow who puts all she has into the offering. He tells his followers that her small gift of two coins is worth more than larger gifts from people of abundance.

By this metric, a million-dollar gift might not be as large as a fifty-dollar gift from someone struggling to get by. Whose name should be on the building? It gets complicated.

Recently, in my own faith context, someone I respect put their name on a gift. Lending their profile will promote a cause they care about and support a new initiative that will benefit the faith community. I’m glad they went public. There’s no one answer to the anonymous giving question.”

Responses have been lightly edited for clarity and length.

More from Canadian Family Offices

• How to short-circuit family disputes, avoid a ‘Succession’-worthy mess
• Post-pandemic spending: Finding meaning in purchase of that party boat
• Succession, the show: Truth behind boardroom manoeuvres?
• Does least-happy child deserve extra helping of parental resources?

Please visit here to see information about our standards of journalistic excellence.