Whose responsibility is it to care for the poor, the orphans, the widows and the homeless?

#1 The Church Relegated This Responsibility to The Government

Deuteronomy 14: 28-29 describes one of 3 tithes mentioned in the Old Testament. This particular tithe was taken every 3 years, and it's purpose was to take care of the poor. This tells us that at the time this was written, the church took care of the poor in this manner. This was not the same tithe that was to be used to support the temple.

It appears to me that the church relegated this responsibility to the government, who through taxes use various programs to satisfy the needs of the poor. Certainly the New Testament teaches us that we should be benevolent, but at this point in time, the church would not be able to meet all the needs of the poor.

Submitted by David Parker.

#2 Humans Have This Pesky Little Incorporation Called Individuality

This question leads one to believe that there is one answer, and that orphans, the homeless, the poor, and widows, are all in the same boat. They are not. To be clear, not all homeless people are in the same boat as each other, necessarily; and the same with widows and the poor.

The question of orphans, on the other hand, is a category all its own. It represents, to me, ultimate helplessness, especially in the instance of young children who are orphaned.

But you were looking for an answer, not a new question.

I believe that it is the responsibility of every individual to take care of him or herself in as much as that person has the ability. Everyone, of every ability level, has times when they must rely on someone else for something. That is a part of the human condition, something that forces us to enter into community with each other. The more a society learns to use each person's strengths to benefit his neighbors and to work together, the more it can thrive. But this is not something that can be accomplished on a corporate level with true success. Humans have this pesky little incorporation called individuality, and that ingredient will forever make it impossible for any society to have a utopia on this earth. That is why communism, while it sounds fantastic on paper, fails miserably in every application. It's because someone has to lead and manage, and because humans need ambition, however small, in order to be happy, and because they desire deeply, uncontrollably, to be happy. It is part of our nature to want to become something. We simply cannot peacefully and happily live in the “ideal” situation where we all work toward the greater good, as defined by someone other than ourselves.

Compassion, however, must drive us to care for those who cannot care for themselves. We must care for our own families, our own old, our own sick. Morally and Biblically, that is our obligation, and also a system which makes sense. If we all cared for our own, there would be a great deal fewer helpless who were not cared for.

But there are very very many in our world who are not cared for and need to be. Whose responsibility is to care for them? That's a very difficult question. As a citizen of our nation, is it my responsibility to care for a helpless stranger. I say no. As a human, however, and especially if you consider yourself a Christian, it is not an option to leave the helpless without help, if it is in anyway within your power to assist.

The answer, then, i think, in short, is "MINE."

Submitted by Beth Rogers.

#3 This Is What Matters!!

I believe the Bible is very clear about our requirements as God’s children to care for the Orphans and Widows.  The book of Deuteronomy has several instructions about caring for Orphans, Widows, and those unable to work, i.e. the Poor and Homeless.  The first thing Jesus states in Matthew 5, The Beatitudes, is blessed are the Meek, the Hungry, and the Thirsty.  Right after that he states blessed are the Merciful.  In James 1 and 2, James, the brother of Jesus, is also very clear about taking care of the less fortunate.  

But 1st Timothy 5:16 explains it a little further by giving an explanation of those who are truly needy. These passages explain that those who have relatives to care for them, or can work for themselves, are not truly needy of our support.  The book of Ruth is a great story about a redeemer kinsman for both the widow Ruth and her widow mother-in law, Naomi.  Ruth turns out to be the great grandmother of King David. Another example can be found in Acts 3 with the Story of Peter and John being asked by a beggar for money.  They tell him they have no money for him and offer him salvation instead.  One point is they probably had some small amount of money they could have given him, at that time the Church was strong and sharing all things with each other.  But they didn't offer the beggar a “Gift”, they offered hope and salvation.  So there appears to be some level of accountability presented in the Bible.

When Jesus was pressed about the greatest of the laws he states to Love God, to Love Others.  Two of the Fruits of the Spirit are Love and Kindness.  When you really do Love someone, you hurt when they hurt.  If you are a follower of Christ and do as he commanded you will feel a certain level of love and compassion for those who are truly needy.  The Church has always been surrounded by the poor and the needy have always been with us.  History tells us that.  It seems sometimes that the poorer or more destitute a person is, the more they realize their need for God and are receptive to hearing his voice and command.  Why is it that Jesus stated how hard it will be for the rich man to enter heaven?  Why did he say if you want to be perfect, go sell your possessions and give to the poor and then you will have treasure in heaven? Then come follow me?


If you open the eyes of your heart, stop, be still, and listen, you will hear the voice of God on many occasions.  I had that happen recently while on a South Dallas mission trip to help the homeless.  My Christian joy was being stunted by several silly and petty issues within my Church life.  I was having issues with the church band, the quality of music we are playing, how we are being lead in worship, and even some of our bible studies and men’s retreat topics.  These seemed to be big and important topics for me and I was not the happiest camper in the building.   While downtown and talking with some of the homeless (who really do sleep under a bridge) I had a break through moment with the Lord.  I clearly heard his voice say to me “This is what matters!!”  I could powerfully feel Christ’s compassion for the needy and lost.  I knew he was talking to me about taking care of those who are truly less fortunate than us and to stop worrying about things that don’t really affect salvation and the message of the Cross.  If you’re honest with yourself and seek, you will see the needs of poor and homeless, those who truly need our help.  They are all around us.

Submitted by Dave Forrest.

#4 Requiring People to Give of Themselves Breeds Resentment & Contempt

The easy answer to the question of who’s ultimately responsible for the poor, the orphans, the widows, and the homeless would be “the government,” but the question itself is not that simple.  In an ideal world there would be no forced charity because requiring people to give of themselves (through taxation) breeds resentment and contempt vis a vis Mitt Romney’s infamous “47%.”  Our government spends untold billions on social programs that tend to instill a learned helplessness on recipients instead of giving them the motivation to overcome their situation and flourish on their own.  Charitable giving should come via people looking within themselves and giving readily and altruistically to causes designed to help those in need.  In return these non-governmental agencies would be responsible for giving the needy a hand-up instead of a handout.  

Submitted by Neal Harkner.

#5 A Microscopic Solution to A Macro-Cosmic Problem

Aside from the fact that I feel we are asking the wrong question here, I think there is a multifaceted answer. The question we should be asking is not who, but how. Determining how we solve the problem is more vital to the solution than determining who solves the problem, and I think it would lend itself to the answer we are seeking. Nevertheless,  I believe that above all else, we have a personal responsibility to take care of our own.  Just as it is my responsibility to take care of myself and my family, it is your responsibility to care for yours.  This may seem like a microcosmic solution to a macro-cosmic problem, but starting on a small scale is an effort worth making.  Solving the problem on a larger, governmental scale, has proven ineffective.  Large scale solutions are the government’s way of placing a band aid over a gaping wound.  They offer the same assistance to all poverty stricken families without considering that not every person is needy in the same way, or for the same reasons.  If we could localize, and perhaps privatize the care that the needy receive, we could go a long way toward minimizing, or possibly alleviating the problem. Charity starts at home, after all.   

Submitted by Lauri Lenox.

#6 Rich In Material Things, But Poor In Spirit

In short, everyone's. I've spent my legal career advocating on behalf of the poor, and from experience I can tell you that the needs of, “the poor, the orphans, the widows, and the homeless,” are multifaceted and cannot be fully addressed by mere donations of money or well-meaning charities. In addition, I am of the mind that the verse from the Bible this phrase is taken from is not necessarily literal. There are those that are rich in material things, but poor in spirit. There are those that have mothers or husbands or homes in a technical sense, but not within the true meanings of those words. To me, the notion of caring for the poor, etc., speaks to the desire from God or the shared humanistic value for us to be more compassionate toward and to take care of one another, and yes, even create a government that represents that notion.   

Submitted by Amanda Love, Esq.