PhilanthropySouth

I saw a post this morning from the Faith Based Philanthropy blog of Paul T. Penley, senior research analysts at the philanthropic advisory firm Excellence in Giving. In his post, Penley essentially says that if donors give just to prove themselves generous or selfless, then their philanthropy (love of human kind) becomes philegy (love of self).

(My first reaction was: "Okay. I can see that. But in this economy, as nonprofits are struggling to deliver vital services, who really cares what a donor's motivation is? Let's take what we can get.")

Continuing his train of thought, Penley says that, 

"In true philanthropy we are not satisfied with good intentions or generous amounts. Rather the measure of our generosity has become meaningful and lasting impact. Our hearts yearn to change the lived experience of people in need, and nothing less will do. We educate ourselves, seek advice, analyze past giving, and strategize for the next move to ensure that our hearts’ desire to transform lives is realized."

Am I reading this wrong, or does it sound like "social investors" are now the only true philanthropists? 

Sorry, I don't buy it. You can be extremely strategic and still be self-serving. And you can be completely selfless and anonymous and create great change in one human's life without making even the slightest dent in the trials of man writ large. 

I don't think faith and selflessness are determined by wisdom or sophistication in giving. And I believe it takes all manner of givers, motivations, strategies and styles of giving to make the fabric of philanthropy. 

I'd also love to hear someone other that the cadre of "philanthropic advisors" weigh in on this debate. 

Foundation folk? Private philanthropists? What's your take?