Evangelistic Charities as Utilitarian Entities
Utilitarianism, the moral code proposed by Jeremy Bentham as a modification of some of the old Greek Stoic philosophies and further popularized by philosopher John Stuart Mill, proposes that moral good can be judged by whether or not any given action will increase the net happiness in the world: the greatest good for the greatest number is the principle ideal in this code. This is of course a simplified view of the theory, which entails somewhat more complexity, but does describe the defining facet thereof. Now, in order to most efficiently spread happiness through good works, there must be an organized manner of so distributing said actions. This can be most clearly seen through example. For instance, if a man wishes to aid poverty stricken people in his area, he can certainly, in complete isolation from others, find such people, initiate contact with them, provide monetary support, and the like. However, the logistics of such an action, while not overwhelming, do cost resources in the form of time, energy, and money that are involved as transmission losses as opposed to actual recipient benefits. However, in a corporate setting, where multiple people act in concert to aid a given cause, many of the logistical facets can be executed once for the entire group, thereby cutting the previously described transmission losses. Because of this effect, it would seem to behoove a Utilitarian community to act in concert when 'spreading happiness.'
An evangelistic charity, an entity focussed on the twin goals of meeting spiritual and physical needs of those in poor areas around the world-- often primarily within the so-called 10-40 window, a block of the globe ranging between 10 and 40 degrees north in the eastern hemisphere that contains nearly 70% of the world's economically marginalized people, can easily be defended under the above conditions as a Utilitarian group. The charity intends to bring happiness to those who are less happy, and does so in a corporate manner, minimizing transmission losses to the greatest extent possible in many cases.
One point that could stand some discussion to defend this hypothesis however, is what is appropriate measurement for happiness. Certainly, it can be argued, there are some minimum requirements for happiness-- these coinciding with the minimum requirements for life. Under that assumption, food, water, shelter, and some level of medical care are certainly prerequisites for happiness that need to be available. Under Utilitarian views, anyone attempting to embrace their doctrine must consider provisions for such things when initiating an action to provide happiness to another. In the case of evangelistic missions, providing for basic necessities is usually a key factor in their activities. Certainly in this area there appears to be no dichotomy between Utilitarianism and the actions of mission charities.