I’ve been emailing with a friend concerning politics and this question came up:
“I have never understood why some people want the government to provide services that the Church is supposed to be doing. For example, isn’t is our job as Christians to take care of the poor?”
(below is part of my response)
“Here’s a story related to your question about Christians taking care of the poor.
When I lived in Nashville, I had opportunities to be involved with the homeless in the city. I did that primarily three different ways.
1) I worked with an incredible group of people called Food Not Bombs. It was a group of people who gathered together ever Sunday and prepared a large meal, went to the Veteran’s memorial in downtown Nashville and feed and ate lunch with about 40-50 homeless every week. The group of people where not Christian at all, but rather a rag-tag bunch of folks who shared an ‘anarchist’ philosophy (topic for another time, but trust me, it’s not bad). They were wonderful, caring, consistent and loving people.
2) The church we attended did not have any consistent ‘ministries’ during the time we were there. The general ‘ethos’ of the community was to go out to eat somewhere every Sunday afternoon after church. I encouraged, asked and pleaded with people to join me in hanging out and feeding the homeless in lieu of or in addition to eating out, no one ever came. No one. I encouraged and pleaded with the pastor to invite a homeless advocate to come and speak at sunday service or right after about the homeless, to educate and inform and help us learn what we could do to help, he never let us do that. And it’s not that our church was full of bad people. They where nice wonderful and caring people. Individually I think they probably did a lot of neat things to care for others. There was a homeless guy who started coming to our church for a while and they treated him with the utmost respect. But, if you asked me if the ‘church’ collectively did things to care for the poor I would say no.
3) I worked with a group called Nashville Homeless Power Project. They are an incredible organization of homeless and formerly homeless individuals advocating, mostly on a political level, for dignity, housing and human rights for the homeless. They practiced civil disobedience at times to make their voice heard, took mayoral candidates on an ‘urban plunge’ to experience a glimpse of what homelessness was like, they advocated for more humane laws to keep homeless out of prisons simply because they had no where to go, and a lot more. I loved working with them, but they where quite political, and though many were Christian and there was a spiritual (primarily Christian) element to many of the things they did, they were not exclusively ‘the church’ and much of what they did was to advocate for the government to do things the church by and large had failed to do. And they did a good job of it, they cared for the poor in our community.
I, just like you, only have a finite number of hours to work or help with any given organization, task, or need. That being the case, I had to split my time between those groups. If your goal is to care for the poor and the ‘least of these’ where would you commit your time to?
For almost a year now I have done a controversial thing. My previous church was somewhat interested in helping the poor, but I felt that all of my time was going towards an sustaining an organization not loving the poor. So, I decided to not attend church in order to spend more time in my community. (Dorchester, Ma a least of these area) I have tried to gather a community of people around me, but have not been successful.
It has been an interesting process and has caused me to rely on my close friends in other parts of the city for my spiritual community. Along the way I have gotten to know a lot of neighbors and have helped do some cool things in the neighborhood. Like plant trees!!!!!
Hmm. Maybe we want the government to provide services because the Church isn’t doing it. What really makes me crazy is that those who are against government handouts for poor people are all for it when the handouts are for the rich or middle class. Home mortgage deductions, socialized freeways, etc are all government handouts for only those with enough money for houses, cars, etc. Why doesn’t the church build the roads and help people buy houses? Actually I think that the church *should* be coming up with creative solutions to help Christians buy modest homes without compromising themselves with debt, but churches aren’t even doing the basics like feeding the hungry most of the time.
Great post. I’ve heard the same argument, and I, too, have to flip the question. Whether or not it’s the church’s responsibility, it it’s not doing it, then someone needs to.
Thanks for this post. This is a question that comes up so much for me because of my involvement in policy. It’s a really frustrating thing to try to explain, and you broke it down really well.
Yeah, everyone asks “whose job is it” or “whose responsibility is it” to care for the homeless. Well, it is nobody’s, really. Yet, if any organization makes a declaration to the public that they are assuming the role of care taker of the homeless, poor etc, then they have a responsibility of living up to that claim. Jesus told his followers to take care of those in need. So, as Christians go about claiming Christ, then they need to follow through on Jesus’ instructions.
The government of the United States of America, declared in the preamble of the Constitution that one of its objectives was to – well just read the whole thing – which at the time it was written, government was synonymous with citizenry –
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America
“…promote the general Welfare” sounds to me like a promise by the government to take care of those in need.
So, yeah, if someone says they are going to do something, then we have every right to expect as much from them – and if they don’t, to demand it.
Both the Church and our Government should be held responsible for taking care of the needy.
Thanks for the thoughts everyone!
Kevin, right on about the constitution. I hadn’t really thought of that, nor remembered that it had any statements like the one above in there. I agree, it’s no one’s responsibility, but those who have committed we can certainly try and hold them to it.
Food Not Bombs! I found out about them a month or so ago, and plan to get involved with them over the summer! So it is sweet to hear that you had a really positive experience with them.
And by the way, I started dumpster diving a few weeks ago, and have had the greatest success at Aldi, as per your advice. Thanks!
Phil,
That’s awesome! I strongly recommend FNB. I’ve done it in multiple cities around the country and have always enjoyed the group of people that are there.
And that’s great to hear about the dumpstering!
This is awesome that this topic has finally come up so specifically here. It gets at the crux of what bothers me about the ethos that I pick up on when I read many of the conversations here. Now, don’t take that as combative or offensive or whatever – I respect everyone that I read here, and find your conversations thoughtful and sincere, and I often learn from them and agree with them. I am just trying to get to my point quickly without a lot of fluff.
I care about people in need and in crisis. I think that partly comes from just being a human, but also from being a adopted child of God and having his Spirit living in me. Therefore, I believe, take seriously, and take action on God’s commands to care for the poor, widows, and orphans. I am not going to give you the list of what I do or don’t do, because that is not the point. However, I am very, very opposed to the idea that government “taking care of the poor” is to be worked for and campaigned for and voted for by Christians as some sort of fulfillment of God’s command to his children that they are to care for the poor. I think that is a completely bogus line of reasoning, and the main reason is this: taking money from people by taxation in order to then provide that money to the poor is charity by force, and therefore it is a perversion, not a fulfillment of God’s command to care for the poor. Would it be right and good and a work of obedience to God’s commands to go to your next door neighbor, demand $10 from him so that you could buy dinner for a homeless person, and put him in cuffs and imprison in your home if he refused? I hope you would say that this would not be proper. Why then is it that any Christian would say that it is right to tax an entire citizenry in order to, in part, “care for the poor” in obedience to God’s command to do so, and then if a citizen refuses to pay those taxes imprison him or her? Some one please tell me!
God’s command is to each of us as Christians. If we do not obey this command, or the church together does not, then it is not a morally equivalent substitute to say that you will therefore work to see to it that government take money from those who are unwilling do give voluntarily or else put them in jail.
Do not misunderstand me here! Taking care of the poor is good and right and an act of obedience for a Christian. If we do not do it, then we have disobeyed God’s command.
Therefore, I think that if you want to argue that your government should tax people (that is, take their money by force, under threat of imprisonment), then you cannot base your argument on God’s command to his people to care for the poor. If you want to make that argument for forced charity, then it must be an entirely secular standpoint, based on some idea of the common good, or collectivism, or some sort of pragmatic argument that it is better for people not to be so poor that they turn to crime, or suffer deprivation, etc. Whether that kind of redistribution of income is good or helpful or effective or whatever is an entirely civic, political, pragmatic argument. Maybe it is good civic policy or maybe it is not, but what it certainly is not is Christian charity.
So, if anyone wants to advocate or vote to support or implement a plan that has government take from citizens by force in order to give to others, then go for it, but I don’t think it is proper to bring God in to it, since He never commands us to take what is not ours, and never tells us to make someone do what is right.
I do realize that this is not likely to be a position that gets a lot of positive response here, but I had to say it, because I believe it deeply. I am open to having my mind changed.
Aaron,
I’ll make my reply short: I 100% agree.
As far as God’s commands for us, those are a standard for us to hold ourselves, not over the government. As a voting citizen though, I am supposed to vote my values, one of which is caring for the poor.
As Kevin pointed out, I think, from a purely secular standpoint, it is perfectly acceptable for us to encourage and vote for our society to uphold it’s constitution.
I also feel that more than encouraging the government to tax more, I’d like it to simply shift the current tax dollars away from war spending and toward more beneficial things. (check out the video from Tuesday)
My statements above were to clarify my perspective, not intended as an argument against your statements. I hope you find them agreeable, if not, let me know more of your thoughts, because from what I read above, I completely agree with your statements.
Also, I’d love for you to point out which other conversations or statements appeared contrary to what you stated above. I am a hypocrite at best.
Ariah-
I think (may need to think more) that it is not a slam dunk conclusion that “voting your values” means voting to have government “care for the poor”. It would take a while, but I think you would have to parse out which values you mean when you say you are voting them, and then what you mean by “caring for the poor.” These are broad generalizations for supporting some very specific things that government does. Surely it would be the case that some of those things fit your values and some do not. (As I point out, God does forbids taking what is not yours, but taxation arguably does just that). Also, surely some of the things that government does in the name of “caring for the poor” may actually hurt them. (For example, what if tax money is used to pay for elective abortions for the poor – is that caring for them, and are those our values?)
I’m leaving lots unsaid I am sure there, but I only have a moment.
Another point: I do not agree, as apparently has been concluded by several posters above, that “promot[ing] the general welfare” means caring for the poor. There has been long debate in this country as to whether the government must or should be involved in charity.
Lastly, as I have to be off, I’ll give you one example of the “ethos” that I alluded to above. The “Make Affluence History” page that is linked to at the top of your blog is a fine example. “Say to your boss, I have enough. Or scrape the sludge off your check and give it away.”, it says. Really? Tell your rich boss to just keep the money? Why not make as much as you can so that you can be in control of more wealth and use it for good? What is one’s (presumably heartlessly capitalist) boss going to do with the money if he keeps it rather than paying it to you or me? Money is sludge, rather than a tool or a resource or a blessing? That is not the attitude that I see in the Scriptures taken as a whole at all.
Try to never buy anything? The unspoken assumption is apparently that buying things, and I suppose selling things, is bad. Again, really?
The only logical result of everyone doing all those things is either that we will all be independent subsistence farmers, or that all industry should be collectivized so that no one makes a profit on anything. Is the Bible really that anti-capitalist?
There’s lots more I could chat about. Again, I hope that in my trying to be quick I have not been short, because I mean no offense in disagreeing here.
If I read the Bible correctly (I used to be a Christian), the church/Christians are supposed to be aiding the poor. Alas a certain faction of them spend far too much time waging war on womens’ reproductive organs and LGBTs to even notice the poor. Therefore the poor have no recourse but to ask the government for help…
I think there is really so much the church can do with it’s own resources. On a larger scale of helping the poor, the government would be in a better position to manage.
Just my thought.
The church has been given authority and dominion on this earth. Through prayer the world can be changed and most by fath. When believers live what the word say about them and give all would spread and this will be a better place for all.
By faith not fath. Excuse the misprint