Godblog

Your choice of "charities" is prerty much a group of elitist anti-christians.
1. The Salvation Army is much more efficient than the ARC. The AEC talks a good talk but use the WTC as an examplar the Salvation Army was on ground zero while the ARC was gathering Millions never intended for WTC releif.
2. You need to be aware of a group called Frontline Ministry out of South Africa. They are very agressive in their AIDS work and outreach.
3. Many of the large "charities" provide their greatist charity to the people are employed there. Just because a charity meets some commonly accepted guides for fiscal disclosure does not mean it is a good choice. Because you put a banner hear means you endorse this "charity". I suggest you get some words defending or at least rationalizing your endorsement of them.

The initial list of charities is a list that I have used for several years. To be honest, I did not think to include the Salvation Army. Locally, my wife and I are more involved with Christian Community Action, as the SA seems to focus more on the larger municipalities of Dallas and Fort Worth, ignoring the smaller cities and towns that surround the two.

I was unaware of Frontline Ministry. I very well cannot point to a charity if I am ignorant of its existence. I shall look in to this organization and its work.

There is also an organization of minister-pilots that fly supplies in to remote parts of the Third World, and I cannot recall its name. I remember reading about it nearly two decades ago, when I first became a Christian (and as an ambitious teenager, wanting to be a pilot). I would like to rediscover that one.

One should also recall that God does not command us to help the poor and the needy from the confines of a Christian organization. Despite the reach of the Salvation Army, the Red Cross still has a larger mindshare in the American public's eye, which doesn't seem to have dropped despite their mishandling of the 9/11 attacks. One should also realize that many of the lost may be turned off in directly supporting a Christian-based charity, whereas they would have no problems supporting a more secular one such as the Red Cross. In my mind, help for those in need is help for those in need.

Regarding charities which seem to only help themselves, this is why we no longer donate to the United Way, which has become such a bloated bureacracy that it has lost site of its initial imperative. Even the Red Cross doesn't advertise the way UW does. (Yes, I realize that most of UW's advertising is paid for by other organizations, such as the NFL. But why do they need to advertise, when that money could be better spent?) Rather, we donate directly to the organizations under the UW umbrella, like the Boy Scouts.

I have heard similar accuations of the Salvation Army, which is why I have been reluctant to "endorse" them, as you say. I am still researching and praying about this particular situation.