In this article, I wish to explore the whole matter of ministering mercy in an age of food stamps, a redesigned but still functioning welfare system and community Food Pantries. Let's tackle it in the form of a CATECHISM, a series of questions and answers.

Question:  Do we even need deacons today? Isn't a church-based ministry of mercy unnecessary? Doesn't the existence of such federal and state government resources as described in the previous paragraph render obsolete the old-fashioned practice of diaconal "benevolence" (or, as the Bible calls it, "alms for the poor")? As one fellow once asked, "Why would I go to deacons and expose my financial crisis when I can go the government without embarrassment?"

Answer: Never forget that, in Scrip­ture, the goal is never met merely by meeting physical needs, much less meet­ing those physical needs without embar­rassment! Rather, the goal is to witness to the world the love of God, the grace that has been shown to you in Christ and is now shown through you to oth­ers. Deuteronomy 15:10-11 makes clear that one of the reasons the "poor will always be with you" is so that the church might always have an opportunity to show what her faith is made of! To be sure, the church COULD refer all cases of poverty to government agencies. In fact, in many places she has become a "broker" of the various agencies, help­ing people use "the system" to its fullest extent and thus diverting all who come to her door, away from that door to other agencies. But when that happens, what happens to the church's voice? Where is the church's witness? We would, in effect, be saying to the world that salvation is to be found, not in the kingdom of God, but in the kingdom of this world!

Question: So you're saying the church ought to forbid people to accept gov­ernment assistance of any kind?

Answer: No, I'm not saying that. In fact, as citizens of the land who have paid taxes to our government to fund such programs as Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare, or (in Canada) a compre­hensive health care system we receive from God's hand when we properly use the benefits of such programs. We should help God's people recognize such and thank Him for His gifts! However, I am saying that in the care of the poor and the defenseless (widows, or­phans and single moms) within the church family, just because we CAN re­fer people to government agencies does not imply that we SHOULD, at least not as the first course of action.

Question: Huh?

Answer: God's people (and those who represent God among them, i.e. the deacons) are not only to spring to action "when all else fails." They should be the first line of defense for the people of God. They should anticipate financial problems, be there at the first sign of troubles that a righteous victim of divorce might face, even going out of their way with generosity of time and money to help people avoid going on the public dole. They ought to do this NOT because the government is inherently evil and because "our local church can solve all the ills in our society," but rather, be­cause God is honored when we love one another. Aristides reported back to Em­peror Hadrian about the Christians he had studied in the early church:

They love one another; they never fail to help widows; they save orphans from those who would hurt them. If they have something they give freely to the man who has nothing. If they see a stranger they take him home, and are happy as though he were a real brother. They don't consider themselves brothers in the usual sense, but brothers instead through the Spirit, in God." (quoted by Chuck Colson, Presenting Belief in an Age of Unbelief, Victor Books, 1986, pp. 35-36)

Remember what Jesus said: The world will "know we are Christians by our love!" Not by our ability to use the welfare system.

Question: So, are we to use govern­ment assistance or not?

Answer: Right!

Question: Don't be cute!

Answer: I'm not. I mean it sincerely. As citizens of the land, we have rights by virtue of our citizenship, by virtue of our tax payments. And the government and its agencies are, after all, agents of God who put them in their positions of au­thority (Romans 13:1-7). As citizens of the Kingdom of God, however, we have the blessed privilege of using God's gener­ously provided resources to send a message of love, to witness to the Lord of grace. When the church won't help someone it should, it sends the wrong message loudly and clearly! While the church cannot hope to replace the en­tire governmental welfare system, it also should not be content to hoard its resources and refuse to help the poor merely because government programs exist. In other words, pick your oppor­tunities wisely and strategically.

Question: What do you mean "stra­tegically"?

Answer: I would not think it wise, for example, for a diaconate to decide that "in order to show the love of Christ to the Smith family, we will advise them not to avail themselves of Medicaid for the heart transplant Bill Smith so desper­ately needs." To be sure, the diaconate and the congregation must be there to assist the Smith family in many ways: with prayer support, with transportation assistance to and from hospital, with help for the kids, dog sitting, and even financial assistance. At the same time, committing to underwrite such monu­mental costs as major surgery while re­fusing aid that appropriately belongs to the taxpayer seems to me to be strategi­cally foolish. In so doing, you strip away your ability to help so many others, and perhaps limit yourselves for years to come. Instead, I suggest you strategically provide the aid that you can in this case and encourage the family to make grate­ful use of God's provision through other means. In another case, however, your strategy might be different. If you have a newly widowed woman in your con­gregation, one without sufficient fi­nances and with no family support avail­able, I believe it would be inappropri­ate for the local church to refer such a person to government assistance with­out first trying to meet her needs itself. Not for nothing does God identify Him­self as the "God of the fatherless and the widow." Just because other assistance is available doesn't allow us to miss the opportunity to say something powerful about who our God is!

Question: So, let me get this straight. The church MUST help wherever the loving character of the Lord is on the line, as in the case of the wid­owed, the defenseless, the orphan – those that He specifically com­mands us to help.

Answer: I think so!

Question: And the church CAN help wherever and however its help will help to "put feet on the Gospel" so that the world knows what our God is like.

Answer: Right-o!

Question: Is there ever a time when the church SHOULD NOT help with resource assistance?

Answer: You bet. The church may not help, even if the government would, where by so doing it would foster the sins of others. For example, the church may not step in to help a widow with­out first confronting an unwilling fam­ily of its Biblical obligations. Paul writes to Timothy (1 Timothy 5:3-8) to "give proper recognition to widows who are really in need." He specifies what that involves, at least part of which is that she must be really alone, without the possibility of family assistance. The church violates this command when it underwrites a widow's needs without holding the fam­ily accountable first. Only in light of per­sistent and stubborn sin (and, I might add, sin which has incurred the disci­pline of the church!) on the part of the family, may the church replace it as God's agents. Another example would be the impropriety of the church pro­viding assistance to an individual who will not work. (Note carefully: WILL not, not CAN not.) If able-bodied people are gripped in laziness, or believe that the world owes them a living, the church AND her diaconate may not encourage them in their sin. Better to cut them off, refuse their request in love, wait for them to fall on their noses, and then be there to pick them up with further rebuke, in­struction, and assistance to find a job! Such is Biblical assistance.