Working with Social Services?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anyone who isn't leveraging social services for Diaconal ministries must have more resources than we do. Or lave a lot less need to meet. Members are paying taxes to support these services. Why should they pay again to duplicate effort? If someone is having trouble with their electrical bill, are you going to give them money, or try to connect them with a utility assistance program? If a single mother has hungry children, are you going to show her how to sign up for the free lunch (and possibly free breakfast program) at school, or are you going to have them stop by your house every morning and pack their lunches?

Do you have the resources to run a soup kitchen, a food pantry, a clothes closet, a utility assistance program, a day care, an ESL program, a rent assistance program, a mortgage assistance program? Even a megachurch would feel the strain at some point.
 
I agree with Edward.

I think there are two barriers in approving this sort of arrangement. The first is social services is often seen as the bad guy, abducting children from the home of their loving parents. Of course we only hear about the mistakes they make (which are sometimes awful) and not the other side. My wife has had several rotations through the pediatrics ward at the hospital. She had her eyes opened about how prevalent real abuse of children is. You would be surprised how many parents think pouring scalding water on their child is an acceptable form of discipline. There are parents who are truly a danger to their children, and sometimes this can only be remedied by the intervention of a government agency.

The second obstacle is an objection from sphere sovereignty. The idea is that the government is doing a job that was given to the church and is therefore overstepping its God-given boundaries. I find this objection overwrought. First I deny that aid to those in need is primarily given to the church. It is clear that the primary responsibility is given to the family (see for example 1 Tim. 5). The reason the church gets involved is because the relation between church members is familial. But the main problem with the sphere sovereignty argument is Scripture does not provide a bright line between the activities of the family and the activities of the state. Instead, there appears to be an organic development from family to tribe to nation with nations later becoming sophisticated enough to take on the apparatuses of a state. Because there was development, pigeonholing certain activities in one sphere is difficult. Even "obvious" activities such as trial and execution were not always the domain of what we would call the state.

For this reason, I don't think we can be against government involvement in aid to the needy on principle. We might have disagreements with certain programs or the way they are run or even decide it is best for everything to revert back to the level of family and church, but we are now firmly in realm of deciding what is wise. So partner with the resources of the community in good conscience knowing that things will never be perfect until Christ returns and wipes away every tear.
 
Following up from Scott's points, I'd add some of my own brief observations.

About 1/3 to almost half of what I do as a public defender has been to represent parents in court actions started by the state Child Protective Services. They usually begin with police accompanying social workers swooping upon a residence under an emergency court order. Emotions run high, and sometimes the state clearly overreaches.

But... most of my cases, when you dig into them, involve pretty outrageous circumstances. Things like:

CPS removes an infant from a motel where the mother is passed out from alcohol and father has broken a window in a meth-induced rage. The infant is crawling around the floor among the broken glass while other no-accounts are sharing a bottle and a pipe.

Child comes to ER and is diagnosed with a broken skull. CPS gets order to investigate home and finds it is impossible to walk into the house without stepping on months old pizza boxes with dried pizza still in it, needles on the floor, sink piled high with moldy dishes, unworking toilet, and loaded rifles propped up against the child's bed.

School reports a child is passing out in class. She is taken to the ER, where they find a glucose level of 500+. Mom has been beating the child because she is drinking too much water and going to the bathroom every half hour. This apparently had gone on for more than half a year.

And many other scenarios.

Social services in my area are stretched to the breaking point, but who else is out there to rescue such children? I tip my hat to them, even when I litigate hard cases against them.

And the amazing thing is that in those scenarios I described above, there is a greater than 66% likelihood (our little county has a high success rate) that the parents will get help through social services, learn necessary skills, get off their substances, and be reunited with their kids. I've got one mother who is successfully raising 4 kids right now, even though a year ago she was an addicted prostitute.
 
For needs within the church: It's good to be aware of available government aid because sometimes it can help in ways the church is not equipped to help. Plus, we pay taxes to make such aid available; it's good stewardship to make use of it when a person who has a need qualifies.

For needs of people outside the church: It's important to do some screening or make sure there's caring oversight that takes aid beyond a disconnected handout. Government agencies are usually better able to do this with people the church doesn't know.

It's also good to remember that goverment agencies often have restrictive rules that may keep social workers from providing aid in some cases where they sense it would be helpful. If a church has a good working relationship with those social workers, the social workers may refer a client to the church when that client has a need that falls outside the government rules. Churches can exercise more subjective judgment and fill important needs in this way. It's a chance to show love to our fellow man and meet needs in our communities.
 
The second obstacle is an objection from sphere sovereignty. The idea is that the government is doing a job that was given to the church and is therefore overstepping its God-given boundaries. I find this objection overwrought. First I deny that aid to those in need is primarily given to the church. It is clear that the primary responsibility is given to the family (see for example 1 Tim. 5). The reason the church gets involved is because the relation between church members is familial. But the main problem with the sphere sovereignty argument is Scripture does not provide a bright line between the activities of the family and the activities of the state. Instead, there appears to be an organic development from family to tribe to nation with nations later becoming sophisticated enough to take on the apparatuses of a state. Because there was development, pigeonholing certain activities in one sphere is difficult. Even "obvious" activities such as trial and execution were not always the domain of what we would call the state.

Scott, do you mind if I quote this at some point in the future?
 
Daniel, I don't mind, but you can find the idea of development from family to state in Chapter 32 of Frame's The Doctrine of the Christian Life.
 
Daniel, I don't mind, but you can find the idea of development from family to state in Chapter 32 of Frame's The Doctrine of the Christian Life.

Thanks, Scott. I thought it was an excellent comment; and thanks for the reference, which I will try to check out.
 
Those are very sad scenarios described above. This is a wicked, fallen world. And while it is so that the present situation pretty much requires the involvement of the state in these matters, I don't believe it is the ideal. The problem with this state is that it is a godless one, so that these behaviors are treated by methods that are godless. The appendages of the state begin to view all people through the lens of the lowest common denominator. The parent that uses boiling water to punish their child is conflated with the parent whose child climbs up on the sink and dips his feet in scalding water unnoticed, and both are treated the same. It becomes 'us vs. them', and if somebody has the law or CPS called on them, they are probably the 'them'. The ER Docs and Nurses, the Police, and the Social Workers all are jaded enough to assume the worst The lack of accountability and shame over sin produces indifference.

I know 2 social workers who work for Social Services. One is a promiscuous drugee who raised her children into profligacy, the other a deranged woman married to a convicted child molester whose 4 children are as certainly bound for prison as I've ever seen. They go into other people's homes and determine if they are fit to keep their kids. A godless state will have godless officials who will abuse their positions and operate from a pagan morality, and they inflict as much damage upon the innocent as they prevent.

I would think that the ideal would be the Church and an Establishmentarian State co-operating in dispensing charity and accountability, with qualified officers carrying out those duties, but we don't have that. So, as Christians, are we best using our resources by co-operating with a godless state, or can we instead trust in our God to provide the means to love as He commands, while exercising whatever influence we have to bring about that ideal?
 
Since the OP request is for thoughts about the article that's where I will start. I think that working with social services should be seen as incidental but not essential. CPS and other "social services" exist therefore contact will be necessary. The goals of Christians helping individuals in the various state "social services" should be, to the extent possible, responsibly getting people moved on. If find the last sentence in the article most problematic:

"Ultimately, just be humble and recognize that social services is doing great work. Remember that they share many common goals with the church, particularly helping the poor rise out of poverty, which we see as the redemption of lives and the expansion of God’s Kingdom in all areas of life."

I don't think many in the industry have that goal. The welfare state is built through coercion and vote buying. Furthermore, the system is riddled with moral hazards that encourage dependency and the status quo. Even after saying as much, the author is a minister of God and I will respect that. His experience and work also give him an angle I don't have. He's making lemonade with many troubled, needy people and indeed they will often be in "social services." In our imperfect workplaces, families and day to day affairs we are called to do the same.
 
One outcome of the social gospel is that the church is supposed to help everyone everywhere. The concerns for justice and helping the poor in the scriptures occurs within the context of the church in both the OT and the new. I raise this point because it seems like the fella in the article leans heavily toward the: we've got to help everybody model. I wonder how much of the gospel can imbue a system that is so entwined with the government? And what about church members? Are they being referred to the government too when the scriptures plainly teach that we are to take care of our own starting with the resources of a family, then moving to the general congregation as need be?

I wouldn't advocate a no-government position, nor would I ignore the grace of the gospel that can extend to helping others. I've personally handed over help in time of need and our deacons consistently help those outside the church (usually in kind -- if a person says he needs help with a power bill, they pay the bill, they don't just hand out cash). This care is accompanied with the gospel. As others have mentioned, we pay taxes and sometimes tax-supported programs may be a reasonable solution, for a time. But we cannot allow our good intentions to put us in bed with Babylon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top