We spent this weekend shooting 4-year-olds at a preschool which is one in a series of “pilot program” preschools that are supposed to improve the overall quality of education in Bangladesh. The theory is, if kids are more prepared for primary school, they will stay in school longer and lower the 40% dropout rate. And, as the story goes, with more education, kids will grow up to be more productive adults, ending the cycle of poverty and causing real social change and decreased poverty. Meanwhile, my Bangladeshi co-workers, who themselves have defeated the cycle of poverty (after all, they have good jobs working at my company, are well educated, and support their families), don’t want their kids to grow up in Bangladesh. And they certainly don’t want them to be educated here. It seems that the people of this country have lost hope themselves in any sort of large-scale, developmental change.

I pondered this dramatic inconsistency during our entire shoot. I used to think that development was development, no matter who did it: faith-based NGOs, or strictly needs-based secular NGOs. People need food in their mouths and clothes on their backs, right? People need a sustainable way to live beyond a hand-to-mouth existence. And that in itself is the purpose of development. If you want to proselytize along the way, that is great, as long as the immediate need is being met; after all, people won’t listen to how much Jesus loves them if you’re not meeting their in-the-moment needs also. But our work with this secular NGO is really changing my opinion. Because if education gets better, and then the educated just flee the country, then what hope is there of making a lasting impact on government or society? The dramatically overlooked factor here is the power of faith and morality to affect a society: the overwhelming impact that the gospel of Christ has on a society whose highest value is not getting caught. This country of supposedly religious people values an honor vs. shame sort of facade, but when it comes down to it, their belief has no moral impact on their actions. And it is only education coupled with an upbringing in integrity – integrity not based on rules and discipline, but on a condition of the heart – that will cause major societal change in Bangladesh.

As I thought about cultures that have been successful through history, it occurred to me that most had a strong foundation of moral absolutes. In the ancient days, failure to adhere to those standards meant death or torture, and it was only by this long arm of the law that “morality” continued to reign. But once corruption persisted on a large scale, the society would crumble. In the high middle ages, as a renewed faith took root in the cultures of Europe, countries seemed to develop and prosper based on adherence not just to laws, regulations, and constitutions, but also laws of the heart: the goodness of men. This was the root of American culture when the Puritans procured their boats and set sail to the New World. And in fact, this “high moral culture” persisted in America for quite some time. Probably until the turn of the 20th century. And, while there are still evidences of that foundation, I think that society is beginning to crumble.

In truth, you can’t tell someone to be good. You can’t tell the government to shape up and give people basic human rights (or good roads or solid education, for that matter). You can’t tell people that the value of honesty and hard work far outweighs the value of a common bribe; but if you can tell them that a God who loves them has given them something totally undeserved, and that all they have to do is show their gratefulness and humility every day – well. You can’t make them believe it, but they’ll see for themselves it is the only thing that can transform a culture.