Christian Charity Forfeits Federal Food in Favor of Faith

The New American ^ | 01 November 2016 | Michael Tennant

[detective]

We don’t force our faith on anybody else,” Chuck Wingate, executive director of Bethesda Mission, told PennLive.com. “But we find the whole idea that the government’s going to come in a[nd] tell us what we can and cannot do in our own facility to be out of bounds, especially in matters of faith.”

Wingate, who says his Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, ministry serves 100,000 people a month, was referring to a new U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulation forbidding recipients of USDA food from requiring “a beneficiary to attend or participate in any explicitly religious activities that are offered by the organization.” A USDA press release stated that the rule was established pursuant to an executive order issued by President Barack Obama and would “provide new religious liberty protections for beneficiaries of federally funded social service programs.”

[detective]

"Charities, especially Christian ones, ought also to be mindful of the fact that the “free” food they get from Washington and other levels of government is paid for by the expropriation of the citizenry; “Thou shalt not steal” contains no exceptions for either government or charities. Furthermore, they should recognize that by accepting the government’s largess, they are also accepting its control, even to the point of denying their faith."

[kosciusko51]

Good for Bethesda Mission. I hope that more Christian institutions do this.

[circlecity]

Christian missions were feeding the poor for over a thousand years before they USDA came along and they’ll be feeding them long after they are gone.

[kosciusko51]

Agreed. But it would be better for them to do it without Federal “help”, as that “help” always comes with strings attached.

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

That’s what i never understood, if a church wants to give up it’s Non-profit status, they can say/preach/politic from the pulpit. but most want the tax break. Am i not understanding it correctly?

[knarf]

America is re-learning her

and her

America repents for having neglected our Lord and FOUNDER and turns again unto HIM for guidance, knowledge and Wisdom.

[kosciusko51]

For nearly 150 years, churches were not taxed and could speak on political matters.

The situation today is that LBJ and company violated the first amendment by lumping the churches in with other non-profit orgs to prevent them from speaking on political matters. This was to spite those churches that disagreed with him in Texas.

Also, my guess is that there are additional ramifications for churches if they do not apply for non-profit status.

[Alberta's Child]

... a new U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulation forbidding recipients of USDA food from requiring “a beneficiary to attend or participate in any explicitly religious activities that are offered by the organization.”

There is nothing wrong with this regulation. The particular point about religious participation requirements is what distinguishes a religious charity from any other non-profit organization. Catholic Charities lost a court battle in California a few years ago over this specific point, and the court determined that it isn't even a religious organization by any objective measure.

This is why these charities should never accept Caesar's money in the first place.

[Nifster]

True words

[Nifster]

You are exactly correct

[Alberta's Child]

This has nothing to do with “preaching from the pulpit,” and nothing to do with the non-profit status of the organization. It’s all about the strings that are attached to government funding.

[Stevenc131]

A local Christian pregnancy service turned down six figure funding from the state of Georgia recently. The money came without strings but was rejected. Somewhere down the line they figured there would be guidelines forced on them, or someone would sue them as a state funded service and try to force them to provide some type of abortion related service. Wise move. ‘Free money’ from governments is never without strings.

[Nifster]

They only ramifications is that they have to pay taxes

[Pecos]

Christians actually saying an audible prayer before eating!!!??? How shocking and divisive. /sarc

Sounds like some Freeper donations would be in order.

[bgill]

Why is a religious organization getting government food?

[HiTech RedNeck]

This is indeed wise.

Charity has to be voluntary or it isn’t charity. A special blessing follows charity.

Let secular organizations (United Way, etc.) do the Federal aid thing as long as there is a Federal aid. Let Christians show what charity is.

[HiTech RedNeck]

It’s NICE if a government is itself deferential to charitable affairs... it’s not NECESSARY....

[Rusty0604]

Catholic charities are getting plenty of money from the federal government as they are a main source of refugee resettlement.

[Delta 21]

But the government feels its OK to take my tax money, (I am a Christian who opposes abortion) and give it out specifically forbidding me to say what it can be used for?

They can use my money to kill unborn humans babies in every state in the union but wont allow me to tell a person down and out on their luck that there may be a higher power in control of things besides our government?

How hungry are you? Will you listen to me blather on about my faith for 5 minutes for your next free meal?

Our government is broken!

[Alberta's Child]

They get about 65% of their revenue from government sources for ALL of their programs.

At that point, it is nothing more than an arm of the welfare state.