Is Welfare the States Obligation, or Ours?

There are so many needs in society, it is evident that the government is a necessary entity in alleviating many of those needs.  A large aspect of the state and federal government is dedicated to assisting with housing, family services, food and nutrition, and financial assistance to help those in desperate situations.

The thought can be tempting to regard those services from the state, which we all contribute to in our taxes, as the remedy that exonerates us from personally becoming involved with someone in need.  This is addressed in part, in a text from Deuteronomy:

“If among you, one of your brothers should become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother, but you shall open your hand to him and lend him sufficient for his need, whatever it may be. Take care lest there be an unworthy thought in your heart and you say, ‘The seventh year, the year of release is near,’ and your eye look grudgingly on your poor brother, and you give him nothing, and he cry to the Lord against you, and you be guilty of sin. You shall give to him freely, and your heart shall not be grudging when you give to him.” (Deut. 15:7-10)

Every seventh year in Israel, there was a command to release everyone from their debts, as well as free anyone who had indentured themselves into servitude.  All civil debts were to be cancelled.

The text above deals overtly with the idea of being stingy with a loan, on the premise that in the following year, there would be no way to collect on it.  But in a broader sense, it addresses the idea that we might feel less motivation to helping someone if we felt that in the future, their deficit was going to be mitigated by an action from the community as a whole.   In the “year of release”, all of the debts of the person would be cancelled by civil decree.   So it would be easy for a you or I to say  “Hey, I know that person is in a desperate situation now, but a big program (the Year of Release) will straighten that out”.    This, the text calls an “unworthy thought”.

We still have a divine obligation to do whatever we can reasonably do.   Sometimes the personal caring and attention we give can be far more effective than an impersonal government program.   Sometimes it is that demonstration of love and caring that provides what is truly necessary.

There is nothing wrong with a state “safety net”, and we fortunate to have a society that does seek to help people in such ways– but we should never let the fact that government programs exist as an excuse for hardheartedness or lack of compassion.