There are over 80,000 registered charities in Canada today. This suggests to me that a wide range of work is considered “charitable” in the eyes of Revenue Canada .

“Spreading the gospel,” (which itself seems to have a wide range of definitions), has historically been viewed as one of those core concepts of the Christian faith. In some cases “spreading the gospel” manifests in traditional forms such as Christian pastors who teach the core concepts of Christianity, whether through a church, or another means.

I would suggest also that the work of a charity like the Salvation Army in feeding homeless persons 365 days a year is another manifestation of spreading the gospel.

In the case of Listen Up TV, it is not that a charity is set up for the purpose of creating TV programmes. Rather, the TV program is one of the means by which the charitable work (spreading the gospel) is accomplished. Our charitable charter also allows for more than just producing television, and as such, we also become engaged in using other forms of media (print and online) and other forms of public education about Christianity (such as events, training seminars, public forums, etc)

I do not question that charities who are involved in charitable wokrds receive excemptions. What I do questions is those “charities” which stretch the definition of charity for their own purposes.

In the case of listen up we have a current affairs program “spreading the gospel”….should people be allowed to set up charities for the sole purpose of creating TV programmes?

Sadly the shenanigans of the few affect the many.

There are some that are so focussed on raising funds that fulfilling their mandate is a secondary consideration. Within discussion streams within BD’s blog there have been a couple of recent glaring examples of such charities that are so blind they cannot see. Funding greed, nepotism, secrecy, over riding concerns about self preservation etc etc.

It’s a shame. Sickening even. On this, PJR, doubtless we would be in full agreement.

By virtue of their charitable status that require charities to operate under a different legal framework there are imperatives and restrictions upon charities that ensure, to some degree, that the same rules that apply to secular corporations and organizations do not and cannot apply to charities. That’s the way it is.

If your rationale is developed further assuming your position that charitable status is a ”crutch” then it would follow that the only conclusion that would satisfy you is that charities should cease to exist – whether the subject charity is “religious” or not.

Perception is not always reality and in the context of the opportunities and challenges faced by charities in making ends meet on a day to day basis and still fulfilling their charity charter my recommendation to those of a more cynical persuasion is to go and work for a charity full time for a couple of years.

Only then will the penny drop methinks.

I guess, I am an unrepentant cynic..but I find that such reasoning leads to excesses like the infamous PTL theme parks and the political posturing under the guise of “spreading the gospel” we see in other ministries.

If christians want to engage society as a whole in the “public square” is it too much to ask that they play by the same rules, and make do without the crutch of charitable status.

In the letters patent for Listen Up TV (which is a rather lengthy document) it is stated that we use news and current affairs to spread the Christian gospel. You’ve suggested that you can’t see that connection.

I’m always glad to hear that feedback. Allow me to explain how we attempt to do that, and over time, to improve at doing that.

Each week we choose a news story, or current event around which to build our program. This week, for instance, our program will revolve around what Christian charities are doing to respond to Haiti. In another recent program, we were exploring the rise in human trafficking that is expected around the Vancouver Olympic Games.

We then introduce a Christian perspective to that topic by asking such questions as, “What is God’s perspective on this situation?” “What can we learn about God’s character in this story?” “How do we see the effects of sin in this story?” “How does Jesus’ offer of a new spiritual life apply in this story?”

The communication of that “golden thread” of the gospel message is how we attempt to fulfill our charitable purpose of spreading the Christian gospel through news and current affairs. We are very conscious of the limitations our charitable status, and letters patent impose upon us and it is a frequent management-level topic of discussion to ensure that we stay within those guidelines.

Each week our producers meet and make decisions on what news stories best allow us the opportunity to fulfill that purpose. We often welcome outside voices into that meeting to add to what our own producers can create. Perhaps you’d be interested in sitting in on that story-creation process sometime, and adding your voice into the mix of how we work with news and current affairs stories. We would welcome it. In a previous post, I gave the phone number for Listen Up TV, and so I offer it again: 905-336.9777

To Tim G’s point about “keeping the wheels turning” our perspective is this: Raising adequate funding for the Christian missionary endeavour (broadly speaking) requires a dependence on God for financial provision. We see God answering our prayers as interested donors join their voice with ours through their contributions. We also see God’s provision as we expand the program’s reach without additional cost through creative arrangements like barters.

When it comes to maintaining charitable status a charity must demonstrate that it is operating under it’s charter and that ultimately is a matter for the charity and the CRA to resolve if there were to be an issue.

The Fifth Estate and WFive are not charities and they could not just declare themselves such as you suggest without serious consequences – unless they were to obtain charitable status through CRA via the prescribed application process. So not sure where you’re headed with that…

To my mind at least the quality of the Listen Up show and the work of Lorna Dueck is of a high standard and the challenge for her and her production company must be how to keep going when funds are so tight in the marketplace – Christian and secular. Therein must lie the rationale for the barter arrangement that at least helps keep the wheels turning in this repressed economic climate.

I have no connection with Lorna Dueck or her Listen Up show but I feel I should ‘speak up’ for Lorna and her team as they show an integrity and a depth of character that is welcome on the Christian broadcasting landscape.

I am not maintaining that Listen up is doing this. My concern lies in the fact that at best Listen up is a current affairs program. How does this program “spread the gospel”.

The second question is this. If Listen up can do this why can’t the fifth estate or W5 do the same. They can declare themselves charities and “barter time” with CBC and CTV respectively…

Just wondering.