Advertisement

Relief for charities?

Share via

o7The Federal Emergency Management Agency announced last month that

it would reimburse religious groups that have supported relief and

recovery efforts in hurricane-ravaged areas of the South. The move

has sparked controversy on both sides. Civil libertarian groups have

said it would be a violation of the separation between church and

state. Some religious groups have said taking government money would

make the church beholden to the state. Should the government

reimburse religious groups for their relief efforts? Should religious

groups accept the money?f7

It cheapens charity by asking to be refunded for it. A gift is no

longer a gift if someone else pays for it.

Most of these congregations, like the individuals who have given,

gave out of a sense of charity and desire to help. As Christ

followers, our very being is to be defined by acts of charity. To

separate charity from a congregation would be like taking Christ out

of the church; the same is true for the individual. We exist to help.

We give regularly to our congregations to be prepared for situations

where we can help, send someone to help. We don’t need or depend on

the government, but on the reality of Christ working in our lives to

accomplish this.

At the same time, I believe that faith groups and the government

can work effectively together without interfering in each others

business. In fact, with congregations in nearly every community, the

church has a greater distribution and commun- ication system than the

government does or can have. We can connect with people and

communities more effectively and quickly than the government. Though

the church does not need the government, the government would be

unwise to walk away from utilizing such an effective network in times

of crisis.

With congregations facing the replacement and repair of

facilities, due to extended use caused by the underwhelming FEMA

response, I think it is appropriate for the government to offer to

help them recover their loses. This is true particularly where the

government approached the congregation for help.

This offer for help should be limited to the losses suffered and

not cover ministries already provided by the congregations. Groups

like the Salvation Army stepped in where FEMA could not respond

effectively and housed more than 76,000 people.

Yes, they are supported by donations, but it will take time to

recover enough to be ready to respond when another need arises. Had

the government been prepared, it could have responded and taken care

of those 76,000 people. They were not, but praise God someone was.

Again, it would be foolish for the government to walk away from

such an effective resource. But don’t look for us to be knocking on

their door for funding.

SENIOR ASSOCIATE PASTOR RIC OLSEN

Harbor Trinity

Costa Mesa

The government should do its job in taking care of disaster

relief. I believe most Americans feel this is the proper use of our

tax dollars. We expect our neighbors who have suffered from disasters

to receive the best help a prosperous and responsible society can

give them. The private sector, religious organizations, volunteers

and donations all play an important role in helping, but basic social

services must be guaranteed by national and local government as a

matter of policy.

Hurricanes should not cause us to make radical changes in how

disaster relief is funded. Instead they should cause us to consider

how consistently ineffective our elected leadership has been in

responding to emergencies and how our tax funds are being

misdirected.

FEMA should direct funds to agencies and groups that are not

religious. The religious groups should provide the services they wish

and fund them in their usual manner.

Churches, temples and other religious organizations provide many

benefits to society, and for that reason they are given tax-exempt

status. Donors who contribute to them also receive income tax

benefits for their charitable contributions. Yet religious

organizations are free to provide their services with no government

interference since they do not receive direct public funding. This

balance of church and state has served us well.

As a member of the American Assn. of Pastoral Counselors, I was

invited to volunteer to be part of a team of mental health workers

who will be deployed in two-week terms of duty over the next several

months to provide support services. The federal funds for this

program are directed to a nonreligious agency, which will oversee the

psychologists, social workers and pastoral counselors.

There are many ways for FEMA to accomplish its goals. There are

many ways for religious organizations to offer their services and

fund their work. Direct government funding of religious organizations

is a step in the wrong direction.

REV. DR. DEBORAH BARRETT

Zen Center of Orange County

Costa Mesa

If religious groups reach out to the afflicted, motivated by the

teaching of “love your neighbor as yourself,” their voluntary act of

loving kindness would be compromised by recompense.

If the help contemplated by congregations looks to be onerous and

a violation of budgetary constraints, each enjoys the opportunity to

evaluate what it can and cannot do and accomplish.

Since the decision to offer relief is freely undertaken, because

it is simply the right thing to do, being “paid back” by the

government undermines the ideal of “disinterested” service. That is,

generosity should be prompted by emulation of God and not proffered

in the hope or confidence of reward. Churches and synagogues should

not view the money expended as lost and which, therefore, need to be

recouped. Rather, such expenditures are the means to distribute God’s

treasure.

The Torah features one commandment repeated 36 times for emphasis:

“You shall love the stranger, for you were strangers in the Land of

Egypt.” In the New Testament (1 Peter 4:8-9), Peter told the

believers, “And above all things have fervent charity among

yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins. Use

hospitality one to another without grudging.”

In neither Hebrew Scripture nor the New Testament is there an

asterisk that qualifies the love and charity, saying, “But be sure to

be paid back!” If there was ever a time to demonstrate faith in

action, to offer sacrificial gifts to fellow human beings, it is in

this hour of disaster.

No institution is obliged to jeopardize its existence or pauperize

itself for the sake of others. But if it chooses to distribute its

funds, its members must know that true philanthropy springs from the

right motivation.

The word “charity” is drawn from “caritas,” love.

The Hebrew for “charity” is “tzedek,” justice.

Love and justice are the impulses that alone commend the gift and

confer on our largess a real value. If our generosity is owed to

anything other than these two inspirations, we miss God’s point.

Neither love nor justice should be offered with strings attached.

What is the reward of the good deed?

The good deed itself.

RABBI MARK S. MILLER

Temple Bat Yahm

Newport Beach

Hooray for FEMA risking what they have never done before and

finally doing right.

Hooray for the American Red Cross and Republican legislators who

lobbied FEMA to do so.

Hooray, above all, for religious charities that rushed in to

provide emergency services much more rapidly, efficiently and

effectively than our government.

Yet, if my understanding is correct, what FEMA will do is

considerably more limited than what FEMA will not do. Two important

questions are: First, are religious organizations eligible for FEMA

repayments only if they operated emergency shelters, food

distribution centers or medical facilities “at the request of state

or local governments” in the three states that have declared

emergencies? And, secondly, is it true that no government funds,

including FEMA’s, are to be devoted to reconstruction of facilities

that were destroyed by the recent hurricanes and which were owned by

religious institutions?

I think yes is the appropriate answer to both questions. And in

the case of the first, it’s the least our government should do, since

the religious organizations were serving “at the request of state or

local governments” and in their place.

If yes is the answer to both questions above, then pragmatic

theology and ethical principles, such as the greatest good for the

greatest number, provide helpful guidance for religious groups. They

should accept our government’s money and immediately use it toward

the substantial recovery work remaining, giving special attention to

doing what government is not, including rebuilding holy spaces for

worship.

(THE VERY REV’D CANON) PETER D. HAYNES

Saint Michael & All Angels

Episcopal Church

Corona del Mar

I don’t think the federal government should reimburse religious

groups for something they already do as part of their mission and

purpose and to which their congregations already contribute.

I do, however, think that there could be grants made to religious

and other nonprofit groups to specifically create programs to help in

the rebuilding process. Organizations could gather together --

similar to the Rebuild America program -- joining volunteers from

many different groups to work on the repair and improvement of

facilities that help those most in need.

Grant money could be provided to purchase supplies while churches

and other groups provide volunteer labor. Grant money could also be

provided to recruit special volunteers from faith based groups to

mentor, educate, counsel and assist those individuals who have lost

their networks of friends and family.

More than the loss of buildings is the fabric of communities torn

apart. Faith based groups are uniquely positioned to provide the love

and encouragement that keep a human being optimistic and moving

forward in rebuilding their lives.

The only danger would be those groups who would use this

opportunity to convert people or withhold assistance if the people in

need were not from their group. I’m sure, though, most of my peers

would be unconditional in their willingness to assist.

SENIOR PASTOR JAMES TURRELL

Center for Spiritual Discovery

Costa Mesa

Advertisement