1

If you just look at purely at material wealth, then yes, the poor in this country are very rich relatively speaking. It is also true that the relative cost of living in this country is so much higher than in Africa. Its just like saying that people in New York are richer than in Lawrence, Kansas. It may seem that way, but a $70k/yr job in NY doesn't get you as much as it does in Kansas. In Kansas, you're living like a king on 2 acres or more of land. In NY, you're lucky if you've got a decent 700 sq. ft. apt. In Africa, you're so wealthy its ridiculous.

I grew up in a very lower middle class black church in L.A. (i'm white) and we sent missionaries to Malawi (one of which was me), which at the time (and probably still is) the 2nd poorest country in the world. It took everything we had to send 5 missionaries and when we got there, the Malaweans thought we were rich and had money to dole out like it was candy. In some ways, we were rich. Very rich, and we were made painfully aware of that fact. In other ways, not so much. They thought that we were the richest people ever, but we would have to explain to them that the $500 they got all year long working in the fields which paid rent, bought bread, etc. for the whole year wouldn't pay for one month's rent in America. The cost of basic living is so much higher, AND we have standards here that make it more expensive to live. Somebody making $10,000 in Malawi is a doing very well for themselves. Someone making $10,000 in L.A. is not. There is a certain relativity to it. But, Americans also expect more too, and that's what makes us "rich" in a sense.

But, in general I would agree, especially when the comparison is malnutrition. When I hear about 10 million children "going hungry" in America, I laugh. They ask the kids if they "ever went to bed hungry during the week". Heck, by that standard, I went to bed hungry all the time, and my fridge was always stuffed (my single mom, who worked 5 jobs and didn't make very much money, always had a full fridge no matter what). I just didn't want anything in it.

This actually reminds me of when (I think it was) Gorbachev came to L.A. and Reagan showed him "the ghetto" and everyone had nice houses and cars, etc. and Gorbachev remarked that it couldn't possibly be a ghetto, because in Russia, the ghetto looked far worse.

2

We survived with the aid of food stamps and government housing until my sophomore year when my mother remarried and our lives returned to a level of economic normalcy.

You mean the government assistance programs helped get you through a tough time and then let your family climb back out of poverty? I thought those programs were only for lazy people who didn't want to work to make ends meet. I can't imagine that it actually helped hold your family off the brink of starvation or helped to keep a roof over your heads until you guys could get back on your feet. Why did we waste our hard earned money on that?

Your family's plight was the result of bad decisions and laziness. The government shouldn't have stepped in to save your youthful butt. You should have had to do it yourself or deal with the consequences of starvation or death by exposure to the elements. That's the American way! Sink or swim.

You also went on a diatribe in the beginning insinuating that America's poor own their own homes, cars and other luxuries so they can't be *really* poor. Sounds like your family wasn't poor then, since you didn't own your own home and didn't have enough to eat.

3

My own two cents here Joe, is that a huge part of this problem is the Evangelical churches spending on average over 6 billion dollars a year on bricks, on "Six Flags over Jesus", as if our campuses bring anyone into the Kingdom or take care of anyone's REAL/not felt needs. Perhaps if we declared a moratorium on buildings, (we have plenty now don't you think) and started using that same money to empty out orphaneges, then people might see that the Gospel can have a impact beyond just the individual. Just a thought...

4

I can very much sympathize with your viewpoint, Joe. My family was much the same way, with many many moves and much self-induced poverty.

One of the problems is that the same attitudes that cause some of the poverty also prevent the people from giving to others. There is the human tendency towards selfishness that shows up in some of those making poor decisions--this selfishness keeps them from seeing that they CAN help others. For example, my parents chose to take drugs and send themselves and their children into years of living in one-room cockroach infested motels, eating mustard sandwiches and selling off all their possessions. When they finally get a steady job, they run up huge credit card bills.

That's not to say that the "poor" shouldn't receive help. They need lots of help. But it is more in education about living and giving, and the soul-healing that the Lord brings.

5

Very good posts on this thread so far, from everyone. Should be a good one.

6

Joe, I lived a similar story: job hobbin' Dad leaves home and with Grandma's help and- yes, government assistance- we were able to keep our heads above water until he came to his senses and returned home. We didn't have much by the American standards of the time, but we weren't poor at all by global standards. But that period of my life softened my heart toward the poor and especially toward the homeless.

I don't recall that I ever saw you call for a complete end to welfare, so I don't get the point of the comment about "sink or swim." Maybe the writer is tring to make a clever point about the a conflict between compassion and conservatism and is just way too sophisticated for me.

In terms of what to give and who should be giving it, I don't think an end to church construction is the answer. It's really not about money. I lead a small ministry in our church, and we do not lack for funds. What we need and what we have a hard time getting is people's time. Our community is pretty well off, so people are only too happy to write a check. What I see is that people cannot part with that which is most valuable to them: their time.

I think the lesson that Jesus was trying to teach us was that we must give him that which we value most. And in a era when we always hear the "I'm so busy" refrain, that precious commodity is often our own time.

7

I was raised in a pastor/missionary family that survived "hand to mouth." We once lived in a mission where we ate pancakes for every meal for two weeks! Being a poor Christian surrounded by poor Christians, I noticed--at least in those days--that Christians were generous with hospitality more so than with money. With our family of five we always had several young people (kicking drugs or Bible-mentoring) living with us. Everywhere we went, US or Mexico, a lot of our fellow poor Christians lived this way. As you can guess, I wouldn't trade my upbringing for anything!

But I don't see this as much now. People are less hospitable--even my own family, though we've sheltered several new believers over the years. I think we're all so much more prosperous that we've become lukewarm in both our giving and our hospitality. Maybe we count more on the church or the organized ministries to do this for us.

8

Joe,
Like you I was raised in poverty. My Mom was single. When my Dad left her my grandma moved in and began to help. ALL of my Aunts and Uncles on both sides of the family pitched in, made sure we had clothes, shoes and food when it got scarce. I never realized I was so terribly poor. I remember several times the church would return my Mom's tithes because they knew she was so poor! I am firmly convinced that her insistance on tithing during this time of abject poverty is what sustained us through those years. Her sisters and brothers helped her move to California and let us stay with them until she found a job. Of couse as soon as she found and Job they helped us move out and begin to stand on our own feet. I think the reason we didn't realize that we were so poor is because of the Joy Of The Lord was her strength. My dad did not send any support and my Mom could have been bitter and mean, but never did we hear any mean or bitter words about my dad. She forbade her Mother to say any bad about dad and lived her life with joy and love. You are so right, help should come from your neighbors, that is the only way any one will be held ACCOUNTABLE.

9

I've been wrestling with this very topic recently as related to the use of my tithe. I've heard both sides of the debate on whether or not I should give this directly to my Church for distribution, or if I should give it directly to the needy - in Jesus' name.

What are the thoughts of those here?

10

Census Bureau report in NYT today:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The number of Americans living in poverty increased by 1.3 million last year, while the ranks of the uninsured swelled by 1.4 million, the Census Bureau reported Thursday.

It was the third straight annual increase for both categories. While not unexpected, it was a double dose of bad economic news during a tight re-election campaign for President Bush.

Approximately 35.8 million people lived below the poverty line in 2003, or about 12.5 percent of the population, according to the bureau. That was up from 34.5 million, or 12.1 percent in 2002.

The rise was more dramatic for children. There were 12.9 million living in poverty last year, or 17.6 percent of the under-18 population. That was an increase of about 800,000 from 2002, when 16.7 percent of all children were in poverty.

The Census Bureau's definition of poverty varies by the size of the household. For instance, the threshold for a family of four was $18,810, while for two people it was $12,015.

Nearly 45 million people lacked health insurance, or 15.6 percent of the population. That was up from 43.5 million in 2002, or 15.2 percent, but was a smaller increase than in the two previous years.

Meanwhile, the median household income, when adjusted for inflation, remained basically flat last year at $43,318. Whites, blacks and Asians saw no noticeable change, but income fell 2.6 percent for Hispanics to $32,997. Whites had the highest income at $47,777.

11

"I’m always hesitant to share this story because we in America tend to have a knee-jerk sympathy for the “down and out.” There are, however, many times, like in my family’s case, when pity is completely unwarranted. A lifetime of foolish decisions by my parents, rather than a dismal economy or lack of opportunity, led to our being poor. We reaped what they had sowed."

First of all, thanks for sharing your story, Joe.

I think 'pity' may be the wrong word here. If by that you mean the stereotypical 'bleeding-heart liberal' ideal that completely separates moral cause and economic effect and wants to blame 'society' for all poverty, then I see your point. But there's a big difference between that and a genuine compassion for people that moves us to help not because of failures and 'foolish decisions' but despite them. As I hear the gospel, it seems to me that loving people in spite of their foolishness with the hope of their redemption is precisely what this is all about. It's about exactly the opposite of reaping what we have sown.

My larger concern is the denigration of systems and institutions, a very evangelical thing to do(I include myself in that group, of course). We seem to have a difficult time making the translation from redemption (not reaping what we sow) in spiritual terms to redemption in social terms. The idea that the same dynamic (sin and compassion) that applies to individuals also applies to systems, institutions, organizations and societies is perhaps a bit too much of a stretch for us.

It doesn't help that the ideal for compassion in a social sense has been dominated by the aforementioned "bleeding heart" model, but the solution is not to throw it all back onto individual charity. From the very beginning the Church as an institution has supported the poor and the marginalized. This happens not merely in a handout sense but by creating hospitals, relief agencies, community development organizations and social justice movements that challenge the existing principalities, be they spiritual, social, political or economic. You don't have to be pelagian to insist that just as sinners shape sinful systems, so sinful systems shape sinners.

At The Brendan Center, we've partnered with an organization called Whatcom Dream to bring assistance and training to low-income folks here in our county. Over the course of nine-months, participants learn life- , financial- and job-skills. For nine years, Whatcom Dream has been engaged in this kind of service, and the results have been remarkable. I don't know if what they do qualifies as neighbor helping neighbor, since it is an institution, but it is driven by the same love and concern for others that you describe in your post.

On a more personal note, I can remember going two weeks with nothing in the house except a box of Captain Crunch Peanut Butter cereal (and no milk). To this day, I can't eat that stuff.

12

Ken C.- Regarding the question of where your tithe should go, I am not aware of any Biblical direction that your tithe must flow through the church. Absent that, I would say you should route the money in the way that you feel most comfortable. We give the most to own own congregation, a good amount to our denomination's missions arm, and then to a number of charities directly. We do not specify that it is in Jesus' name as he knows what's in our hearts and it seems boastful to us to say that, especially to a secular organization. But I would advise that you do what you feel most comfortable with. If i could be so bold, I would bring you back to the question of donating not only your money, but your time as well, suggesting that we are called to give up that which we value most and that might not always be money.

13

I' sure My family and I fall into this catigory, Yet God has provided me with a way to attend collage, have a computer,yet by our standerds here in America, We live in gross poverty. I all how you persive it.
And for the gentelman who is so concerned with the way churches are built. I still belive God Is in controll. I am a member of Hope Community Church in Manitowoc WI. Our building is 4 years old and we are adding on. I hope you don't mind it's a metal structure building, with that brick overlay stuff to help it look like a barn. All the "other " new chirches are brick, and stained glass etc, And if God did not approve iI think he would stop them in their tracks.

14

joe,

i have to say i am shocked. this almost sounds like... ahmen, a liberal post.

not the normal, 'i picked myself up by my bootsstraps, so everyone else can too' that i normally hear from conservatives with poverty backgrounds.

now, i don't want turn this into a political thing, but honestly, how can you wholeheartedly support an adminsistration that blatantly and outrightly purports supporting the upper class and big business? do believe they will bring about change through reagan, trickle-down economics? or, do you think it really doesn't matter what the government does, that it is the church's responsibility to help people in need and not the government's?

if so, do you honestly beleive the church will give enough to make any sort of difference? the only church people that spend any time in the ghetto are poor people themselves, middle class at best, or one of those pinko-commie groups like the mennonites or the quakers. the tammy fes and jim bakkers of the church (and there are plenty) will not get their hands dirty, as you pointed out.

15

tommythecat,

not the normal, 'i picked myself up by my bootsstraps, so everyone else can too' that i normally hear from conservatives with poverty backgrounds.

I think you are reading more into the post than is there. The government didn’t lift us out of poverty, marriage did. My mother remarried a man who was stable and worked hard which caused us to get back on out feet. Welfare programs kept us from starving and for that I am grateful. But if I would give any “government program” credit for lifting me above my economic condition it would be the military.

now, i don't want turn this into a political thing, but honestly, how can you wholeheartedly support an adminsistration that blatantly and outrightly purports supporting the upper class and big business?

Because the “upper class and big business” are the one that create the jobs that helps the poor earn a living. Because I believe in economic reality rather than a class warfare.

do believe they will bring about change through reagan, trickle-down economics?

I believe that if it hadn’t been for Reagan my extended family would have remained poor.

or, do you think it really doesn't matter what the government does, that it is the church's responsibility to help people in need and not the government's?

While I wouldn’t exclude government’s role, I think it is the churches responsibility. The government is a faceless bureaucracy that cannot fulfill the real human needs the way the church can.

if so, do you honestly beleive the church will give enough to make any sort of difference?

Sure, if Christians would stop promoting the welfare state and start acting as God intended.

the only church people that spend any time in the ghetto are poor people themselves, middle class at best, or one of those pinko-commie groups like the mennonites or the quakers.

I’m not sure where you live, but the biggest help for the inner city in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area is church and religious organizations. Perhaps that’s because we don’t have a large number of Quakers or commies around here.

16

The fact that the government has to have a “safety net” to catch those who would slip between the cracks of our economic system is evidence that Christians fail to do God’s work.

Actually that is not true. The poverty rate has stagnated and slightly grown since the start of the welfare state. Prior to the welfare state, there was plenty of charity, but then charity got "nationalized."

The real problem with the welfare state is that it turns the productive citizenry into de facto slaves and makes any pretense that America is a free country a joke. You can balk at that, but in the simplest terms all slavery is, is forcing someone to work for someone else without compensation. I see no difference between plantation slavery and forcing the middle and upper classes to effectively work for the material benefit of the lower class without compensation from the lower class.

Welfare isn't charity, it is slavery. Charity is chosen freely, slavery is forced on.

17

A few years ago I had a chance to meet Marv Olasky who wrote "The Tragedy of American Compassion." His thesis was that American churches and religious organizations won the war on poverty and then the liberal apostacy with its universalist and materialist soteriology destroyed the concept of "deserving poor" and advocated transfering compassion from the private to the public sector. One glorious Federal sun would shine much more brightly than a thousand points of light, right?

Another thing Mr. Olasky said was that the poor are not poor because they lack money, as much as because they lack life-skills. The story motivating this post shows this. When the family got a father with the life-skills to hold down a steady job and support his kids.

I don't approve of just giving away everything i have willie-nillie to the first poor person i meet. if it is drink that made the person poor, we can predict where the money will go. I strongly advocate guys like Dave Ramsey who help people acquire life-skills. Evangelicals should be willing to sit down with their poor kin and offer Dave Ramsey or Larry Burkett style help. That said, this post raises a qualm of guilt and I shall consider what more I can do. (Guilt-manipulation is a favored Evangelical blood-sport.)

18

I was raised by a single mom back in the 50s, when it was most uncommon. Spent the first 9 years of my life with us living with my grandparents, who were blue collar. We did not get any government money nor did we get anything from my "dad". And I have had many friends who have used welfare programs while the children were young and gotten off them as soon as the kids were in school.

From what I've seen, if someone else will provide you with enough to get by, you will lose incentive to provide for yourself. It has to be demeaning enough, and you have to have self-esteem enough to want something better. A lot of the proverty in this country is caused by bad personal choices. If you chose to have a child when you are a teenager and unwed, you definitely are looking at some poverty in your future. For every one that sits around waiting for the government to give them more, there are more who are putting themselves through school without government help.

When I worked at the last call center, one guy told me that he always overpaid his taxes, so he could get a big tax refund. To me, that's poverty thinking. And spending your money on prepared lunches when you are making $8 an hour is more poverty thinking. All the government in the world is not going to change that. You have to change people's minds and attitudes.

And by the way, to those who are saying that Bush's economic policies have failed: after 13 months out of work, I've been in two new jobs this year, each paying more than the last. I've moved past that $8 an hour job, because I had experience in the computer field that I gained after going back to school. I'd previously done factory work. When the economy picked up, so did my job offers. While I'm not making as much as I did in the late 90s boom, I can afford to pay my mortgage again. And I'm working in my dream job.

Poor people need, more than anything, for someone to open their eyes to the possiblities in front of them. They need to take it on themselves to improve their job skills and gain the personal skills that will let them advance.

19

The Church problem is the confusion between charity & compassion, and gov't help. The former is peaceful, & voluntary. The latter is based on forced tax collection. The force is justified because "the rich won't pay their fair share" -- the force is based on destructive envy of the rich.

Real charity can't be forced -- but being forced to pay taxes can, and does, reduce real charity.

My own suggested solution: "Jesus was a Carpenter". Create church oriented organizations that are employment maximizing, and offer a job to all poor people. Building wood furniture, if nothing else. Even at a loss, in terms of selling it. Free market corporations are part of the Peaceful Creation of Wealth, that the Church has not yet fully incorporated into its spiritual considerations.

A gov't analogy would be a National Service Corps, offering a military style job (and the UCMJ!) to any and all volunteers, who "need a job". If the gov't is going to be the paternalist provider of cash, they should accept the responsibility to be the provider of "how to live" rules: nightly curfews, 12+ hours/ day duties+limited option recreation. NO obesity "sickness". Etc.

Hire lots of welfare mothers -- including required lifestyle training on chastity, home economics, television monitoring, cleaning of homes, home teaching, reading out loud, etc.

Or not -- have the program, benefits AND duties, voluntary. For those who "need" it, enough to accept the program.

20

Mike,

Taxes and welfare are not slavery. Government does not make you work, in fact, it creates a disincentive to work. Government does not decide what your job will be, the hours you will work, or the pay you will receive. It merely requires that one pay a portion of any income one happens to make. This is not slavery. If you believe that our taxing and spending policies are inappropriate, the correct moral term is theft.

21

Mike,

Taxes and welfare are not slavery. Government does not force one to work, set one's wages, choose one's job, or set hours of work. Government merely take a portion of what we choose to make. One is not forced to work for another, but one is forced to share with another. Therefore, if a taxing and spending policy are inappropriate, then the moral term is not slavery but theft.

22

Joe,

Don't you think that the current wealth in society and the existence of the safety net drive down giving. People simply do not see the need. This is both a good and bad thing.

As for Africa, you have a point, but most people simply do not feel connected to that land. People see genocide and know that much of African poverty is deliberately caused by Government policy: Many dictators understand that starving people do not make good rebels. For example, Saddam never gave the food-for-oil food and supplies to his people. He hoarded much of it and gave the rest to his army. You can give until it hurts and not do one bit of good to starving Africans.

Satan's created a system where there is very little opportunity to give money meaningfully. That is not to say that there is not a lot of opportunity to help your neighbor.