The Cost of Homelessness: Central Florida Commission on Homeless Cost Analysis

Living on the streets isn't cheap: Each chronically homeless person in Central Florida costs the community roughly $31,000 a year, a new analysis being released Thursday shows.

The price tag covers the salaries of law-enforcement officers to arrest and transport homeless individuals — largely for nonviolent offenses such as trespassing, public intoxication or sleeping in parks — as well as the cost of jail stays, emergency-room visits and hospitalization for medical and psychiatric issues.

In contrast, providing the chronically homeless with permanent housing and case managers to supervise them would run about $10,000 per person per year, saving taxpayers millions of dollars during the next decade, the report concludes.

The findings are part of an independent economic-impact analysis that will be discussed Thursday afternoon by the Central Florida Commission on Homelessness.

"The numbers are stunning," said the homeless commission's CEO, Andrae Bailey. "Our community will spend nearly half a billion dollars [on the chronically homeless], and at the end of the decade, these people will still be homeless. It doesn't make moral sense, and now we know it doesn't make financial sense."

The vast majority of long-term-homeless residents have some sort of disability, Bailey said. They are veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder; men and women with mental illness; or people with severe physical disabilities.

"These are not people who are just going to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and get a job," Bailey said. "They're never going to get off the streets on their own."

Last fall, the commission spent $15,000 donated by the Orlando Solar Bears to hire the Tulsa, Okla.-based company Creative Housing Solutions, which conducted the analysis. Researchers worked with local homeless outreach programs to identify 107 long-term-homeless residents living in Orange, Osceola or Seminole County. Using actual jail and hospital records, they tracked public expenses through the years to come up with the yearly average of $31,065 per person.

That figure was multiplied by 1,577 — the number of chronically homeless people throughout the three counties. In both cases, the figures were considered conservative.

"We didn't even include the money spent by nonprofit agencies to feed, clothe and sometimes shelter these individuals," said lead researcher Gregory Shinn, associate director of the Mental Health Association Oklahoma in Tulsa. "This is only money that we could document for the individuals we studied — and it's money that is simply being wasted. The law-enforcement costs alone are ridiculous. They're out of control."

The expense is particularly high for the city of Orlando, where many of the chronically homeless live on the streets. The most recent homeless census put the number there at about 900 individuals. In Osceola County, which has an estimated 300 chronically homeless residents, permanent housing for the homeless may be a tougher sell.

"The report's numbers actually reflect more what's going on in Orange County and Orlando," said Niki Whisler, homeless-advocate coordinator for Osceola. "Our priority here are our families, especially in hotels."

But for Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer, the findings validate what he has already proposed, he said.

"I can't say I'm surprised by the cost," Dyer said. "We recognize that a large percentage of these individuals roam the streets of our city."

In his State of the City address in April, Dyer vowed to get a third of the chronically homeless — some 300 people — into what's called permanent supportive housing within three years. Such housing is typically a government-subsidized apartment with a case manager to ensure the tenant is getting medical and psychiatric care and other services.

Researchers estimated the cost of permanent supportive housing at $10,051 per person per year. Housing even half of the region's chronically homeless population would save taxpayers $149 million during the next decade — even allowing for 10 percent to end up back on the streets again.

"We're not going to bat a thousand," Shinn said.

Bob Brown, president and CEO of the Heart of Florida United Way, said the cost analysis underscored the need to take action on chronic homelessness.

"This is no longer [one person] from the Coalition for the Homeless saying we have to do something," Brown said. "This is a reliable consultant who has used proven methods for calculating the cost. Hopefully this will finally get the attention of community and government leaders. We can't wish this away."

Joel Hunter, a homeless-commission member and senior pastor at Longwood's Northland megachurch, said he hoped the faith community would help persuade parishioners that supportive housing is the way to go.

"We're going to need to present to them how much wiser it is to address this problem than to ignore it," he said. "I don't think there is a huge momentum to fix homelessness at the moment, simply because a lot of people don't see it in front of them every day. But if we can make the business case as well as the moral case for them, I think we can build a desire to help those who need it most."

ksantich@tribune.com or 407-420-5503

SOURCE: http://touch.orlandosentinel.com/?#section/1229/article/p2p-80272962/

Obama Welcomes Christian leaders to White House for Easter Prayer Breakfast

Pastor Joel C. Hunter offered the opening prayer at the fifth annual Easter Prayer Breakfast at the White House.

WASHINGTON POST: "Report Argues for Lifting Ban on Politics From the Pulpit"

Even as polls show Americans broadly oppose electioneering from the pulpit, a new report by a group of faith leaders working closely with Capitol Hill argues for ending the decades-old ban on explicit clergy endorsements. The report being given Wednesday to Sen. Charles E. Grassley — the Iowa Republican whose office for years has been probing potential abuses by tax-exempt groups — comes as the ban has become a culture-war flashpoint.

More than 1,100 mostly conservative Christian pastors for the past few springs have been explicitly preaching politics — they call the annual event “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” — in an effort to lure the Internal Revenue Service into a court showdown. Meanwhile, groups that favor a strong church-state separation are going to court to demand that the IRS more aggressively enforce the ban that dates to 1954.

The report by officials of major denominations (including the Southern Baptist Convention and Assemblies of God) and large nonprofit organizations (including the Crusade for Christ and Esperanza, one of the country’s biggest Latino evangelical groups) argues that the ban chills free speech and violates the culture of people who see the weaving of faith and political expression as essential to their religious practice.

Forty-two percent of black Protestants and 37 percent of white evangelical Protestants say houses of worship should endorse candidates, according to the Pew Research Center. Among Americans overall, that figure has been in the 20s for a decade.

The report focuses on faith groups but would apply to secular 501c3 nonprofit organizations as well.

Some members of the Commission on Accountability and Policy for Religious Organizations said lifting the ban was more about principles than pragmatism.

“I think there are some pockets of very conservative folks or very liberal folks who will use this in a partisan way. But when you become more specific [about candidates] you cut off a big portion of your congregation, and not a lot of religious leaders want to do that,” said Joel Hunter, leader of the Florida megachurch Northland and a sometime adviser to President Obama. “The issue is: Do they have the freedom to do it? For me it’s a First Amendment issue, a religious-freedom issue.” Hunter says he preaches on environmental and poverty issues and policies but not specific candidates.

Experts and even leaders of the commission agreed with Hunter that most clergy wouldn’t want to endorse from the pulpit — not because of the IRS but out of fear of alienating members at a time when young Americans in particular are fed up with the merger of partisan politics and religion. But, they say, the IRS’s spotty enforcement — the IRS doesn’t go after the Pulpit Freedom Sunday clergy, for example — and the complex tax language leaves many houses of worship afraid of even legal speech about particular measures or policies.

It’s unclear what will happen to the report, which was compiled by 14 Christian leaders, many of whom have worked in the past with Grassley on financial accountability issues.

The commission was advised by a much more religiously and politically diverse group of 66 faith leaders, a subset of which wrote an opposition paper arguing that the ban “has served to protect houses of worship in America from government regulation and from divisive partisan politics dividing the church communities.”

The group of 66 included leaders from all major branches of Judaism, major Muslim and Hindu groups as well as Methodists and Mormons, among others. It wasn’t clear how many of the 66 backed the proposal, but the commission chairman, Michael Batts, said support was “strong.”

A spokeswoman for Grassley said Tuesday that the senator “is weighing next steps.”

The report follows a controversial blowup over how the IRS chooses which groups to target for enforcement, and many are seeking change at the IRS. It also comes as Congress is seeking new revenue and potential tax code changes that would affect nonprofit organizations.

Efforts to drop the ban have been proposed before and failed.

The report also argues that the ban on the use of ­tax-deductible funds for political purposes — such as church coffers going to a campaign — should be maintained.

“We think this [report] would allow for respect without creating a monster — that churches could become in essence [political action committees],” said Batts, a leading expert on accounting for faith-based nonprofit organizations. “If they had money and could disburse it for political activities, that would be problematic, but this is just speech — saying what you believe.”

The report follows years of work by Grassley’s office and evangelical leaders on the issue of financial accountability.

A decade ago, Grassley began investigating whether several high-profile television ministries were violating the law by using tithes for things such as for-profit businesses, planes and jewelry. His office disappointed the most enthusiastic reformers in 2011 when it found no wrongdoing and asked a well-established council of evangelical oversight experts to make recommendations for self-governance.

That group, the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability, created the new commission. In December it made recommendations on the broad topic of financial accountability that Congress has not acted on. Members then turned to the separate issue of religious speech, which is the topic of the new report.

Some critics say it lacks credibility.

“This whole thing has a fox-guarding-the-henhouse feel to it and always has,” said the Rev. Barry Lynn, a United Church of Christ minister who heads the group Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. Lynn said his group has brought multiple examples to the IRS of clergy preaching against votes for President Obama, and he said nothing was ever done.

Experts on religion in the United States say that even as Americans are becoming more turned off by partisan politics in religion, they are becoming more and more likely to see their faith as driving them to policy activism.

But there remains disagreement in the faith community about explicit endorsements. The commission is largely made up of conservative evangelicals, but a more liberal group called the Bright Lines Project also is looking into changes at the IRS and also proposed an exemption for political speech at houses of worship under certain circumstances.

By Michelle Boorstein, Source URL: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/report-argues-for-lifting-ban-on-politics-from-the-pulpit/2013/08/13/57aab53e-0449-11e3-88d6-d5795fab4637_story.html

Florida legislators join anti-Islamic crusade

by Scott Maxwell, Orlando Sentinel

Last week, someone told the Rev. Joel Hunter that they hoped his family dies in a fire.

Why? Because Hunter had the audacity to speak out against intolerance, specifically intolerance against Muslims.

Hunter quickly paid the price, receiving hundreds of angry emails, including the death wish.

This is the state of discourse in Florida.

And it's fostered in part by the people you elect.

You see, once upon a time, the fringy crusade against all things Islamic was led by a handful of legislators who would boycott peaceful prayers by imams and file goofy bills that common-sense legislators ignored.

Unfortunately, Florida is increasingly known as the state where common sense goes to die.

A bill that was dismissed last year as irrelevant — one that tries to prohibit Islamic and foreign laws from affecting Florida court rulings — is now gaining steam.

Even the bill's sponsor, Sen. Alan Hays, struggled to cite examples of the problem he was claiming to solve. Instead, Hays called his bill "preventative."

The fringe-o-sphere, however, claims Islamic Shariah law is creeping into America. So they are backing a bill that would supposedly ban judges from relying upon any and all foreign laws.

Apparently patriotic Americans don't take kindly to foreign precedent (never mind the Magna Carta).

Foreign-based court rulings are scant, if not nonexistent, in most places. Chief judges I polled said they have never cited any and describe the controversy as manufactured.

Still, even if there were questionable rulings in lower levels of the judiciary, it wouldn't be an issue for the Legislature to address.

You see, in America, we have separation of powers — which brings us to the biggest problem with Hays' bill: It's probably unconstitutional.

Don't take it from me. The senate's own analysts concluded his bill could be "an infringement on the essential role of the judicial branch in violation of the constitutional separation of powers."

Analysts spent a solid two pages describing all the "technical deficiencies" in the bill.

Undeterred, a Senate committee passed it anyway — with the support of local Republicans Andy Gardiner and David Simmons, guys who normally know better.

Many sensible people of all faith and partisan stripes remain opposed to this unneeded bill.

One of them is Hunter, the well-known pastor of Northland, a Church Distributed.

In a short statement to the Senate, read by a Muslim, Hunter described the bill as unneeded and rooted in bias. Hunter noted that he is a conservative evangelical, and pointed out that "objecting to unnecessary law is a conservative principle as well as a libertarian one."

Hunter later told me he viewed his statement as simply "a common-sense response."

But remember: This is Florida.

Hunter was immediately targeted by groups such as the Florida Family Association — a group that teeters back and forth in trying to decide who it wants to demonize most: Muslims or gays.

"There were letters that said, 'I hope your family dies in a fire,' " Hunter recalled. "Just horrible, horrible things."

Often those who scream loudest about the Lord are His worst disciples.

And the most unlikely to appreciate the irony of their rants about "religious extremists."

Hunter said he bears no ill will — even for the folks who offered death wishes.

"I just feel so sorry for those people," he said. "Because they're walking in fear."

I respect Hunter's ability to empathize. But my concerns go beyond empathy.

Because these people's hyperbolic fears are threatening to infringe upon my Constitution.

And because our legislators are fanning the flames.

SOURCE URL: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/os-scott-maxwell-joel-hunter-muslim-sharia-law-20130402,0,6046322.column

Joel Hunter Responds to Accusations of Islamist Association

- - -

The Florida Family Association is calling Pastor Joel C. Hunter, senior pastor of Northland Church in Longwood, Fla., to the carpet for “partnering with Islamists to oppose an anti-Shariah bill in the Florida legislature.”

The Florida Family Association is claiming that Hunter is helping the Hamas-linked, Jihadi apologist, Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) to stop laws from being enacted that would prohibit courts from accepting Shariah law. The association also published Hunter’s personal email address and invited readers to contact him.

According to the Florida Family Association, if Florida courts accept provisions of Islamic Shariah law or other foreign laws and legal codes which are inconsistent with American laws, it will undermine public policies enacted by our representative form of government and change our value system.

Atif Fareed, a Muslim and former chairman of CAIR Florida, said Hunter, the spiritual advisor to President Obama, asked him to read the following statement:

“To my state senators: As a pastor of one of the largest churches in Florida I believe Senate Bill 58 will do more harm than good if enacted. Its effect will be to increase bias rather than protection. It seems to me to be a cure without a disease. Existing law and judicial precedent have proved sufficient to deal with any concerns addressed by this proposed law.

“Having confidence in both our constitution and the character of our judicial process, I agree with the America Bar Association, the Anti-Defamation League and the American Civil Liberties Union that this law and House Bill 351 will be detrimental rather than the good intended. As a conservative evangelical Christian it is unusual for me to side with the ACLU but I think objecting to unnecessary law is a conservative principle as well as a libertarian one. Indeed, not making laws unless they are absolutely necessary is at the core of our character as a country. Thank you for considering my views.”

David Caton, president of the Florida Family Association, said he could not wait until the committee meeting was over to inquire if Hunter actually authorized or requested Fareed to present this statement to Florida Senators.”

“I sent … email to Joel Hunter to which he affirmed yes in less than five minutes,” Caton said. “He must be really proud to align with the Council on American Islamic Relations.”

Charisma News asked Hunter about the issue. He told us the way it has been interpreted has misrepresented his position.

“I am not aligning myself with CAIR, the Muslim Brotherhood, or any other Muslim organization. I am not for Shariah or any other foreign law to compete with our Constitution. My response to a man who lives in our community (Mr. Fareed) was that I believe our present safeguards are more than capable of keeping those laws out,” Hunter says.

“My opinion is that SB 58 is an unnecessary law that increases bias and heightens animosity between Christians and Muslims—which makes respectful dialogue and sharing Jesus with them all the more challenging. I'm certainly not in favor of any foreign law that would take away our rights under the Constitution.”

Source URL: http://www.charismanews.com/us/38877-joel-hunter-responds-to-accusations-of-islamist-association

How the Church Should Respond to Same Sex Marriage

Last month President Obama publicly acknowledged his support for same sex marriage in an interview with ABC News. Shortly before the interview, the president called Dr. Joel Hunter, pastor of Northland Church near Orlando and a spiritual adviser to the president, to tell him about his decision. Hunter told the president that he disagreed with his view on marriage, but the decision would not fracture their friendship.

I had the privilege of meeting Dr. Hunter and his wife in April at the White House Easter Prayer Breakfast. As we walked along the grounds of the White House and West Wing, I asked Dr. Hunter about his friendship with President Obama. He told me what he said to NBC News last week: “I love him and he’s a friend.” We also discussed how his church members have responded to their evangelical pastor being so close with a Democratic president. His response was both wise and full of grace.

So when news broke about President Obama’s “fully evolved” position on same sex marriage, I decided to contact Dr. Hunter about it. Specifically, I wanted to know what he was saying to his congregation about the matter, and how he thinks other Christians should react to the rapidly shifting cultural views on marriage. Once again, his thoughtful remarks struck me as both wise and gracious.

What are you telling people in your church about the President’s announcement last week that he supports same sex marriage?

First, it gives us a wonderful platform to reemphasize the definition of marriage as God has laid it out in Scripture. We are not free to redefine it once God has defined it. Secondly, I am saying we have to be careful not to enter into a culture war. We have gay people in our congregation. They are people made in the image of God, and we want them to come close to him in Christ and follow God. So we have to remember that this is a hurtful issue for many, many people and we have to be very respectful as we talk about it.

Third, we have to remember that this is a leadership issue. The church should not try to manage society. 1 Corinthians 5:12 says “what have we to do with judging outsiders?” Our business is the Church. We have to be careful not to expect people to follow the same values that Christians follow. Even though marriage is a sacred thing to us, that doesn’t mean it is to everybody. So as this conversation continues, we need to differentiate what is expected from a biblical, obedient Christian and what’s expected from someone who is acting from another worldview. They may have every right to make whatever legal arrangements they want for their relationships, but we have to make sure that the church is protected to do what it believes it is right and not violate its conscience.

Rather than fighting against same sex marriage, do you feel we should be working harder to protect religious liberty?

I think the conversation needs to be extended to include protecting religious liberty. Right now the conversation is only about the civil rights of gay people, but let’s also lift up the rights of those who want to practice their religion without being afraid of lawsuits. If gay marriage becomes civil law, then we need protections for the churches that choose not to marry gay couples. We need to know we will not be open to lawsuits. We do not want to be forced into something that would violate our conscience and our faith.

Was that part of your conversation with President Obama?

When the President called me, I told him that his support of gay marriage is going to be perceived by some Christians as a war on religion. I don’t agree with that, but we’re talking about perception here. I also told him there is an opportunity to lift up both sides--respect for gay people and respect for religious practices that limit the covenant of marriage.

How did the President respond?

He is there. The President is a Christian, and he gets it. He knows what we believe about traditional marriage, and he doesn’t want to violate religious conscience. But there is still a lot of conversation that needs to happen to see how this will actually work out. Until we hear statements and see policy that protects churches and religious liberty, then I’m not sure everyone will be reassured.

Are you concerned that this announcement will spark a new round of culture wars?

Yes, I am. It’s starting right now as people are beginning to organize a response, and given the history of some of these leaders it could become another culture war. But we need to be a third voice saying we don’t need to go there.

What advice do you give pastors who are scared to address marriage or gay rights issues because they’ve become so politicized?

I absolutely understand why pastors are reluctant. Some pastors live in fear of upsetting people because they don’t want to lose their jobs, but many of us are also concerned about dividing the congregation. But we still have to talk about God’s “Plan A” for marriage and raise up examples of exemplary marriages. We don’t have to approach this as a culture war and say the nation is going to hell in a hand basket. We can talk about the positive principles of Scripture without attacking those who disagree with us. I think more pastors feel equipped to do that.

What about critics who say the divorce rate within the church is doing more to harm marriage than anything else? Have we lost moral authority on this issue in the culture?

They certainly have a point, and they can point out our failings. But our platform will always be Scripture. We must stand on Scripture with an understanding that what it says is very difficult for people.

FIND THIS ARTICLE AT: http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=87188c8737bc50c1a2fb8e2c9&id=5696f25902&e=d3ef06aa8b

New Faces of Homelessness

In Seminole County, one in every 50 children are homeless and that’s growing. This CBN story documents hardship and the hope for changing their lives.

A Tax Day Bible Lesson

Jesus’ famous line on paying taxes is “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (Mark 12:17)What is less well remembered is the reason Jesus called out both the political and the religious leaders who asked him about whether you should pay your taxes: Jesus “knew their hypocrisy.” (Mark 12:15)

FIND THIS ARTICLE AT: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/a-tax-day-bible-lesson/2012/04/15/gIQAv3YCKT_blog.html

There’s nothing more hypocritical today than the kind of political gamesmanship we have about paying taxes. The most vivid example of this is, as Erza Klein so rightly says, the “dumb tax pledges that dominate Washington.” These dumb tax pledges, especially “Grover Norquist’s now-infamous pledge” that Republicans have taken never to raise taxes on anyone for any reason, effectively ended our capacity to have government function properly. Of course, now, as Klein points out, Democrats are being forced into tax pledges of their own, exempting those who earn less than $250,000 per year from having their taxes raised. Dumb and hypocritical.

Taxes happen, friends. Nobody likes them, and yet it is certain they have to be paid. Daniel Defoe, in “The Political History of the Devil,” (1726) coined the famous phrase, “Things as certain as death and taxes, can be more firmly believed.” Death and taxes. They’re inevitable.

Taxes happen because taxes are how you fund government and you can’t have a government unless you have revenue.

Of course, the attack on taxes from the political right is an attack on government and its right to even exist. Norquist has said, “I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub,” thus, of course, abolishing it.

Government needs to exist and in fact be celebrated. It’s U.S., all of us, and the way we take care of each other. We have a moral responsibility to our fellow citizens, both from a civil and a moral perspective. We are one people. The problem is that some of us, in fact, many of us in this difficult economy are struggling, and we need to help those folks out. Government does that.

The “small government” or even “no government” folks want to say that the churches should pick up the slack on taking care of the poor instead of us paying taxes for a social safety net. Rev. Joel Hunter, a prominent evangelical pastor, has recently noted how unrealistic that view really is in a recent talk with the title, “Government is Not the Enemy.”

Hunter’s church does a huge amount of humanitarian work, but, he says, they can’t do it all without the government:

“Look at the math. It is ridiculous to even, just look at the SNAP – Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the old Food Stamps program – it has been estimated by I think the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities that the average church in America would literally have to double its budget and just take that extra budget and give to hungry people. And that is just one government program. So let’s not fool ourselves.”

What is hypocrisy but ‘fooling yourself’? That’s what Jesus is talking about. Don’t be a hypocrite. We need taxes to run the government, and we need government because it does things no individual or even organization can do on its own.

Don’t be a hypocrite. Pay your taxes.

Even the Romans used the taxes they collected to build infrastructure, per Monty Python, the British comedians. Besides, everybody deserves a good laugh on tax day.

An On Faith panelist and former president of Chicago Theological Seminary (1998-2008), Thistlethwaite is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.

By Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite

Pastor Joel Hunter: "Government Can't Change Lives, But They Have Resources We Need"

It's not uncommon to hear the idealistic argument by small-government proponents that if the church did its job, then there would be no need for the government. But an evangelical pastor who is also one of President Obama's spiritual advisers said that looking at the numbers, it is not possible for the church to replace the government in feeding the poor, let alone meet other needs.

Dr. Joel C. Hunter, senior pastor of Northland, A Church Distributed in Longwood, Fla., gave a short talk at the Q Conference in Washington, D.C., Tuesday evening with the title of "Government is Not the Enemy." Hunter, who was named one of the 50 most powerful people in Orlando by Orlando Magazine in 2011, leads the 15,000-member Northland church, which is well-known for its humanitarian work in the community.

Northland has sent relief teams to neighboring states when they were devastated by natural disasters, been involved in the Homeless Services Network in Central Florida, worked with local schools to feed children from low-income families, and has organized community green cleaning events, among other activities.

Despite all of his church's humanitarian efforts, Hunter believes that the government is needed when it comes to helping the poor.

"Look at the math. It is ridiculous to even, just look at the SNAP – Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the old Food Stamps program – it has been estimated by I think the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities that the average church in America would literally have to double its budget and just take that extra budget and give to hungry people. And that is just one government program. So let's not fool ourselves."

Hunter recalled a conversation with then-presidential candidate Barack Obama during which he said that the faith community is tremendously underutilized. Obama had agreed, but also added that the church cannot do for the common good what the government can. The Florida pastor had also agreed.

"Government can't change lives, but they have resources we don't have. We can change lives with those resources," said Hunter, who served on the first Obama administration Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.

"The point is government isn't the enemy, and government isn't the answer. But government is the potential partner that we look for, that we might need."

Earlier in his talk, Hunter discussed what the biblical view of government is. He said the biblical view of government is it is an instrument of God. Pointing to the Bible, the Florida pastor said there are two types of relationships that God's people had with the government: the outsider – a prophet that would rebuke those in authority, such as Jeremiah, Amos, or John the Baptist; and the inside adviser – a person who would speak and guide the unbelieving government, such as Joseph, Nehemiah, Esther, Daniel, and even Paul who used the judicial system of his time to give a witness of what Christ had done for him.

"God has always seen to it that believers had some role in the institution of government," Hunter said.

The Q Conference in Washington, D.C., opened Tuesday and will conclude on Thursday. Some 700 Christian participants are gathering in downtown D.C. at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium to hear 30 presentations by church and cultural leaders on a wide range of issues that are aimed at inspiring them to come up with innovative ways to shape the church's future role in culture.

Speakers at the Q DC event include: New York Times columnists David Brooks and Ross Douthat; author and cultural historian Os Guinness; Elevation Burger Franchise Ventures founder Hans Hess; and D.C. pastor and author Mark Batterson.

Michelle A. Vu

"Supplement Government Funding With Personal Help," by Dr. Joel C. Hunter

“Love ... does not insist on its own way.” —1 Corinthians 13:5

Faith-based communities offer the kind of support and empowerment that can break the cycle of poverty. We need to supplement government funding with personal help. And the first step in personal individualized help is understanding the world in which those in poverty live. Without some training, we could make matters worse and even become angry at the very people we are trying to help if we presume their responses to our efforts will be ones that match our values and lifestyles.

Because of two 60 Minutes pieces on homeless school children in our county (Seminole County, Florida), people in our congregation and other county groups got fired up to help those families transition out of poverty. It seemed wise to our church leaders that we train our congregation members in understanding poverty and some of the thinking of those who are poor. We adopted a course from the Billy Graham Institute for Prison Ministries on transitioning out of generational poverty.

Part of the course alerts those of us who have never been poor to our lack of knowledge on what it takes to survive without adequate income. Would you know where to get help if you had little or no money? What places offer food and how do you get there without a car? Which agencies offer which kind of services—housing, medical attention, job training, child care—in addition to any financial help you can get? Additionally—and this is key in being able to love well—how do those in poverty think differently than those in the middle or upper class?

This training is enlightening for many of its middle-class participants, who often are able to come to the point where we can see ourselves as likely to have the same response in various situations as do people living in poverty. Let me give a few examples. When you are in poverty, you ask a different question about meals than when you are in the middle class. In the middle class, people might ask, “Did you like it?” In poverty, the question might be, “Did you get enough?”

Those in poverty see resources differently. In the middle class we are more likely to turn to possessions in times of need. “Do you have savings? An emergency fund? An IRA?” For those in poverty, relationships are often the most valuable source of aid—“Who do you know that can help?”

When you are in the middle class, bills come first and vacations are optional. When you are in poverty, living with the constant pressure of survival, fun is so much more important—there may be nothing more coveted. The story is told of an elementary school girl who let it slip to her teacher that her family did not have a refrigerator. The good-hearted teachers pitched in from their already-meager salaries and surprised the family with a refrigerator. The next few days the girl was missing from school. When she returned, she again thanked the teacher and told her that they had sold the refrigerator and gone camping. They needed the break more than they needed the appliance! The way they chose to use this gift illustrates a difference in thinking that would make many who have plenty to share angry enough to stop engaging, if we are limited to our own perspective.

Both those in poverty and those who are not need training. We need to build understanding as well as skills to break the cycle of poverty, because our obligation as Christians is not just help, it’s love.

Dr. Joel C. Hunter is senior pastor of Northland Church in Orlando, Florida.

FIND THIS ARTICLE AT: http://sojo.net/magazine/2012/04/mile-your-shoes