Better Way to Help the Poor and Needy: Christian Charity or Government Programs?
Posted: Friday, June 17, 2011
by Mogama
http://www.mogama.info
It seems like a simple, straight forward question until you are the person taking the calls from what appears to be an endless line of needy people asking for assistance with gas money, utility bills, motel room, rent, diapers, food, on and on. Our church used to pay motel bills for total strangers until we began to be swamped by an ever increasing number of calls for the same thing: Is this Church For All? Yeah, can y'all help me with a couple of nights at so and so motel?
The few people we helped were spreading the word. Then the motel owners started urging their non-paying customers to "Call Church For All". Actually, the motel calls are the smaller bills. The really big ones are the utilities and rents, and they often come with emotional tolls as the needy relate stories of babies or cancer patients who have not eaten for days.
With over 200 churches in Owensboro, only a handful have any plans to consistently give food or financial assistance to the poor and needy. Some bad players within the ranks of the poor and needy make it easy for most churches to dodge calls for help by "gaming the system". These do-nothing churches suspect that just about everyone calling for help is a crook; it's a guilty before proven innocent attitude towards the needy.
Few of the churches who cater to the needy in our city contribute money to the Help Office, which then distributes food, clothing, money, etc, to needy people from throughout the community. This centralized system works somewhat, but the Help Office regularly runs out of funds. When that happens the needy fall back on the few helpful churches, and many of those needy people hear the familiar "We are out of funds for the month."
Due to this reality I must admit that as inefficient as I know government programs are, not to mention how government assistance often steals the dignity of those helped, there is no way Americans churches can "take back" the role of being exclusive helpers of the needy. Yes it is better for the poor and needy to depend on God, not on Government, and that is probably a biblical view, especially in light of the practices of the New Testament Churches. However, we must not twist the Bible too much for a view that disparages Government assistance for the poor in exclusive favor of the poor running to Christian or Religious Charities for help.
It seems to me that a partnership between both Church and Government is more in the interest of the needy than an either or approach.
Let's take quick glance at benevolence in the New Testament period.
First off, for the most part, those who received help from the New Testament churches were church members or Christians, not just any person in need (see Acts 2:44-45; 6:1-3). The needy list often included orphans and elderly widows (see James 1:27; 1 Timothy 5:3-4,16). Though Christians were expected to "do good to all", fellow Christians held priority over unbelievers (see Galatians 6:10). For example, the famine relief offerings that the Apostle Paul collected were largely for the poor "saints", a reference to Christians (1 Corinthians 16:1; 2 Corinthians 9:12). Even Jesus' feeding of the multitude was for the crowd that listened to Him preach and teach (see Mark 6:32-44).
That left out most needy people in the society of the first century. Churches still cannot afford to give financial help to most needy people in our various communities. The typical church simply does not have that kind of money.
Secondly, some property owners in the Jerusalem Church were eager to sell their real estate and give the proceeds to the Church leaders so the poor and needy would be cared for (Acts 4:34-37). How many church members do you see lining up to sell their property to assist the poor and needy? Are our churches financially ready to take on the gigantic expense of feeding, clothing, sheltering and providing healthcare for the poor and needy? Why don't get started on an unparallelled capital campaign first? Otherwise we come across as a big joke, trying to kick Government out of the charity business!
In the third place, the first century churches had almost zero overhead. No big salaries. No insurance policies. No huge utility bills for the church building. No church buildings or mortgages to tackle. Today our churches seem to spend most of their resources on salaries, buildings and other expenditures that leave little for relief to the poor and needy. How many youth ministers, music ministers, children ministers, and all those other myriads of professional position holders would serve as volunteers so potential salary funds can be diverted to charity for the poor and needy? Show of hands, anyone?
To put it mildly, churches are not in the position to be nearly as generous to the poor and needy as the New Testament Christians were. The rhetoric we may have, but the resources? Show me. Until that harsh reality changes, Christians cannot in good conscience preach that Government get out of the charity business. If the churches are too greedy to do serious charity, too swamped with overheads to do charity, too burnt by the "gamers of the system" to be less suspicious of the needy, then we should really be thanking God that Government is there to pick up the tab. We should not be asking for an assignment we know we do not have the personnel or resources to do well.
My contention is that if Government were to end all poverty programs right now, problems related to hunger, homelessness, diseases, etc, afflicting the needy would exacerbate at a proportion none of us would be able to put into words. Add sudden adversities due to natural disasters, wars, and other man-made disasters to the mix, and the churches themselves would be among the beggars.
There may be just one way the Government could get out of the charity business and leave it to the Church to assist the poor and needy: Government gives the money for charity to the Church! But that would effectively make the Church dependent, not on God, but on Government, and who wants that?
For my part I am thanking God that Government is helping most of the poor that the Church is unable or unwilling to help. It's a lifesaving partnership...for now anyway. ~mogama~
With over 200 churches in Owensboro, only a handful have any plans to consistently give food or financial assistance to the poor and needy. Some bad players within the ranks of the poor and needy make it easy for most churches to dodge calls for help by "gaming the system". These do-nothing churches suspect that just about everyone calling for help is a crook; it's a guilty before proven innocent attitude towards the needy.
Few of the churches who cater to the needy in our city contribute money to the Help Office, which then distributes food, clothing, money, etc, to needy people from throughout the community. This centralized system works somewhat, but the Help Office regularly runs out of funds. When that happens the needy fall back on the few helpful churches, and many of those needy people hear the familiar "We are out of funds for the month."
Due to this reality I must admit that as inefficient as I know government programs are, not to mention how government assistance often steals the dignity of those helped, there is no way Americans churches can "take back" the role of being exclusive helpers of the needy. Yes it is better for the poor and needy to depend on God, not on Government, and that is probably a biblical view, especially in light of the practices of the New Testament Churches. However, we must not twist the Bible too much for a view that disparages Government assistance for the poor in exclusive favor of the poor running to Christian or Religious Charities for help.
It seems to me that a partnership between both Church and Government is more in the interest of the needy than an either or approach.
Let's take quick glance at benevolence in the New Testament period.
First off, for the most part, those who received help from the New Testament churches were church members or Christians, not just any person in need (see Acts 2:44-45; 6:1-3). The needy list often included orphans and elderly widows (see James 1:27; 1 Timothy 5:3-4,16). Though Christians were expected to "do good to all", fellow Christians held priority over unbelievers (see Galatians 6:10). For example, the famine relief offerings that the Apostle Paul collected were largely for the poor "saints", a reference to Christians (1 Corinthians 16:1; 2 Corinthians 9:12). Even Jesus' feeding of the multitude was for the crowd that listened to Him preach and teach (see Mark 6:32-44).
That left out most needy people in the society of the first century. Churches still cannot afford to give financial help to most needy people in our various communities. The typical church simply does not have that kind of money.
Secondly, some property owners in the Jerusalem Church were eager to sell their real estate and give the proceeds to the Church leaders so the poor and needy would be cared for (Acts 4:34-37). How many church members do you see lining up to sell their property to assist the poor and needy? Are our churches financially ready to take on the gigantic expense of feeding, clothing, sheltering and providing healthcare for the poor and needy? Why don't get started on an unparallelled capital campaign first? Otherwise we come across as a big joke, trying to kick Government out of the charity business!
In the third place, the first century churches had almost zero overhead. No big salaries. No insurance policies. No huge utility bills for the church building. No church buildings or mortgages to tackle. Today our churches seem to spend most of their resources on salaries, buildings and other expenditures that leave little for relief to the poor and needy. How many youth ministers, music ministers, children ministers, and all those other myriads of professional position holders would serve as volunteers so potential salary funds can be diverted to charity for the poor and needy? Show of hands, anyone?
To put it mildly, churches are not in the position to be nearly as generous to the poor and needy as the New Testament Christians were. The rhetoric we may have, but the resources? Show me. Until that harsh reality changes, Christians cannot in good conscience preach that Government get out of the charity business. If the churches are too greedy to do serious charity, too swamped with overheads to do charity, too burnt by the "gamers of the system" to be less suspicious of the needy, then we should really be thanking God that Government is there to pick up the tab. We should not be asking for an assignment we know we do not have the personnel or resources to do well.
My contention is that if Government were to end all poverty programs right now, problems related to hunger, homelessness, diseases, etc, afflicting the needy would exacerbate at a proportion none of us would be able to put into words. Add sudden adversities due to natural disasters, wars, and other man-made disasters to the mix, and the churches themselves would be among the beggars.
There may be just one way the Government could get out of the charity business and leave it to the Church to assist the poor and needy: Government gives the money for charity to the Church! But that would effectively make the Church dependent, not on God, but on Government, and who wants that?
For my part I am thanking God that Government is helping most of the poor that the Church is unable or unwilling to help. It's a lifesaving partnership...for now anyway. ~mogama~
This Article has been viewed 1,062 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (4 total)I have a few simple answers to solve this problem. One for the Government to get out of the Charity business it should not terminate it instantly. That would be irresponsible. In the process of terminating the programs it should give more incentives to give to charities that would cover those program in terms of tax deductions. As for the government providing it-they are not just supporting the needy but also the lazy. What is a good way for the church to distinguish this easily. Require everyone it helps that is able bodied to do some work. 2Thessalonians 3:10 For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat.
This will eliminate most that are trying to work the system as they are to lazy to work in the first place.
Also it is possible to put some proper screen processes in in order to distinguish those that are truly in need from those that are not. Paul advocated this. 1Timothy 5:3-4 3 Honor widows who are really widows. 4 But if any widow has children or grandchildren, let them first learn to show piety at home and to repay their parents; for this is good and acceptable before God.
For a church not to have a screening process shows a lack responsibility in using the resources that God has given that church to help others.
To leave charity to the government is to abandon an opportunity that God gives us to show his light to the world and promotes secularism rather than what is right and good. We are to be salt and light to the world if we have to abandon charity to the government because we cannot handle it is a sign of failure of doing our duties as Christians.Please log in to respond to this comment.I cannot agree more with your suggestion of a screening process within the church. I was formally a hotel manager and had the great displeasure to deal with quite a few grifters and what I consider lazy theives. I recall a husband and wife team who came to the hotel on the first night paid by an area church. I thought they were guest speakers or something of the sort and thought nothing of it. But as the days stretched on I began to see what was happening. A different church paid for the room each night. The husband and wife would most often split up and be picked up in the lobby by separate churches and taken to services. I then learned that most often collections were being taken up for them and they would meet back at the hotel with cash laden pockets only to begin again the next day. Talking with church members who would either call in or come by to pay for yet another night gained me quite a bit of insight into these two. They were presenting a wide range of different stories about their plight whether together or individually which was different still from the one they gave to me. I had to have contact with them daily as the check out hour would approach without payment for another day. At first there were pleas that I have mercy and give them more time, but after a few days the attitudes became cocky as the informed me the room would be taken care of shortly by such and such church. After seven days of this when yet another church was calling in to pay for their stay I initiated a conversation with the church administrator and carefully explained my concerns and what I was seeing. This is a tricky undertaking. Well meaning christians and fine people, they can easily become offended. Indeed in this case, I was told the church didn't concern themselves with things of that nature, they simply helped those in need. I gave up, but after two more days when they were running out of churches and had started all over again, the picture began to sink in. They got in their car and moved on. I would like to say it was an isolated incident but sadly it was far from it. Now unemployed and searching for work, I am one of the minion. It's been a month now and while my concerns grown and finding a job is not so easy, I have no intention whatsoever of taking the charitable route unless of course (never say never) dire tragedy should shock me into an unpredictable situation. I would strongly stress that each church should spend time on developing a screening process. It is an outrage and so horribly unfair that grifters should take the generosity of the church thus depleting resources for those truly in need who are far more deserving.Please log in to respond to this comment.
Another great one, Mogama. I cringe every time I hear someone talking about how the government should get out of the charity business and let the church do it. There are so many examples of church leaders being irresponsible with money, how could that even be a consideration? There are many people-groups reviled by various denominations, can you imagine if these churches were responsible to decide if those people were worthy of unemployment checks? What a disaster that would be.
For me, I can give money to a single mom who will stretch every last penny out of it, or I can give it to the church down the street which has a record of spending 97% of their budget on overhead like salaries, electric bills and mortgages. The right thing to do seems obvious to me.Please log in to respond to this comment.Thanks, Bruce, for the compliment. I'm not one to speak ill of churches in one broad sweep since much of my life revolves around a church. But it is simply not practical or realistic to unload all the hungry, the homeless, and other needy people on the churches in any given community due not only to financial but logistical reasons; the resources just don't add up. Unless churches are revamped to handle such a load of needs, it would be a disaster.
In fact, I wager to say that those who vouch for churches to bear the full load of charity to all needy people within society probably do not give enough to churches to make this ambitious platitude become reality. When it comes to charity, our priority should be those in need. It does not matter if the needy are helped by the government or by churches as long as they receive timely and sufficient assistance. That's all I'm saying.Please log in to respond to this comment.I appreciate your position. I do think as a Christian it is necessary to take that exact position: "It does not matter if the needy are helped by the government or by churches as long as they receive timely and sufficient assistance". My sentiments, exactly.Please log in to respond to this comment.
Thank you, Mogama. You said this so well and so right. As a man involved with the poor and needy this sounded like a Constitution for Needy Ministry. I will be sharing this article (with your permission) with my students and my church. The Government does have a right and need to help but the real help must come from local churches and individual Christians who get it. God is their need and He brings help through His sons and daughters in Christ who need to wake up from their sleep and see what God expects of them. Your analysis of Scripture was beautiful. Thank you.Please log in to respond to this comment.It's an honor, Don, for you to share my article with others.Please log in to respond to this comment.
Fine and interested that christian charity helps the poor people by giving them donations
Please log in to respond to this comment.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.