Blessed are those with permits, Or...

... The Empire Strikes Back

Another post from our Streams of Justice blog:

Vancouver restricting church's mission to help poor, charges pastor
Last Updated: Friday, August 10, 2007 | 1:24 PM PT
CBC News

A Vancouver pastor says a Vancouver city regulation is preventing her church from fulfilling its mandate to help the poor.

Mardi Dolfo-Smith, of the 10th Avenue Church on the west side of Vancouver, says that twice a week, people come in to her church for free food and sometimes shelter.

When the church started to renovate two years ago, the city's planning department said it needed a social services permit, because helping the poor is not in the church-use permit, says the pastor.

The church has since applied for a social services permit, but not all churches have the same resources to meet the permit's onerous conditions, she says.

"We're concerned that the city is separating our faith into different areas. We're also concerned that this will be too onerous for other faith communities, smaller ones, ones that maybe don't have the resources that we have."

The real issue is that churches are called to help the poor, and always have been, says Dolfo-Smith.

Read the rest here.

And...

Do you have a licence for that good deed?
PATRICK BRETHOUR
August 11, 2007

VANCOUVER -- Do unto others as you would have them do unto you - but in Vancouver, make sure you get a permit from city hall first.

Tenth Avenue Alliance Church is challenging the city's stipulation that it acquire a licence to perform charitable works, arguing that it shouldn't have to seek formal approval in order to heed the biblical admonition to comfort the poor.

The church ran afoul of city rules after it started renovations several years ago. Homeless people who had lined up at the back for meals served twice a week began to line up out front instead, sparking complaints from some neighbourhood residents concerned that crime would start to rise.

The city then told the church that it needs to acquire a social-service licence if it wants to continue to feed large numbers of people, and act as a shelter in winter months.

Mardi Dolfo-Smith, senior associate pastor, said her church and others are petitioning the city to waive the licensing requirement for religious organizations. "The dispute is about the larger issue, whether a church needs a permit to care for the poor," she said.

Read the rest here.

Comments

[robert]

well, why don't we just ask Jesus what he thinks.
"Jesus, should this church have to abide by the rules of it's society even though its intention is to do good?"

"Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s."

"Well, there you have it folks. Straight from the deity's mouth."

Churches should not be made to perform gay marriages if they don't want to do so (your club, your rules) but they are also part of our society and need to abide by the rules of the day. No exceptions because guess what? Then the next group comes along and claims they don't need to follow the rules, etc., etc., and the next thing you know, we atheists are the only ones who have to pay for parking.
If atheists need permits to feed the poor, so do churches.
Get the permit.

[beth]

You can't really blame city hall. Most churches are not in contravention of the city ordinance.

In fact, I'm betting most decent christian folk would agree with the beaurocrats. Isn't that the governments responsibility?

[Mike]

Exactly, Beth. Wilsonian made a similar comment on the original post on our Streams of Justice blog.

Robert, you need to do 2 things: Think context and think bigger picture.

Here's the context: The world is coming to Vancouver in 2010, and there's nothing the mayor would like better than to have his homelessness problem disappear. Unlike Atlanta, he'd never get away with giving the poor one way bus tickets, or simply locking them up for no reason. At least not yet. Instead, he's vigorously prosecuting people for doing things that for the most part only poor people do. Google "Project Civil City" and "Vancouver" sometime, or better yet, avail yourself of some of the resources we've identified on the Streams of Justice blog. I've seen this myself. At Hastings and Main they're aggressively citing people for jay-walking. At Hastings and Howe they are not.

Now think bigger picture. Already people here are strenuously advised by police not to give money to panhandlers. I can see a time in the not too distant future where that advice becomes law. Also, what constitutes a feeding program? What if you give a sandwich to the homeless guy you see on the street? When will you need a permit for that?

I don't want to sound like an alarmist, but this looks a lot like the thin edge of the wedge, and I'm wondering when loving your neighbour becomes illegal.

[robert]

Two questions:

Should people be allowed to withhold medical care from their children if it contravenes their religious beliefs?

What do you do when the Moonies/Raelians/Tom Cruise set up booths offering food/shelter to the homeless in exchange for participating in their programs? Should there be any government oversight of this?

We live in a society that lives by a set of rules. Our religious institutions must abide by these rules. They enjoy some benefits and special dispensations and tax breaks but certain rules must be followed.

Sounds like the mayor is a jerk and I can't speak to what's going on in the DTES and I'm obviously not advocating a crackdown on the poor but if anyone can do anything under the guise of religion, it opens the door to a lot of possible crackpots. Getting a permit doesn't strike me as an onerous hurdle.

[robert]

why do you agree with Beth and argue with me? We're saying the same thing.

[Mike]

Dude - I hear you, but ultimately this has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with poverty.

And no, I don't think you are saying the same thing as Beth. By my read (and correct me if I'm wrong, Beth) she's making a tongue-in-cheek statement about the fact that many Christians don't concern themselves with the plight of the poor.

[robert]

oh. Her sarcasm was lost on my innocent ears.
You knwo, we have to be careful who we consider to be "safe". You feel this church is trying to do the right thing so you're prepared to cut them slack. I know and trust you so I'll take your word for it.
The same goes for when I hear someone else talking about "The Kingdom", dude, the words "whack job" are the first that pop into my head.
Then again, I think that about you too but at least you're our whack job.

[david]

Robert, I hope you're prepared to share your whack job with the rest of us because some of us consider him OUR whack job now.

[Mike]

Ahem... Robert has just Crackberried me from London (where he's visiting the offices of my former employer). Apparently he's in the middle of a meeting and can't comment from the Crackberry, so he's asked me to.

And so here, unedited and unabridged, is Robert's latest. The fact that I am entering it marks a new low in my blogging life:

David my friend, dude's got enough whack job for all of us.

Carry on.

[david]

Try as I might, there is nothing clever left to say. Robert wins. Forever.

[beth]

you have me pegged. i'm cynical. i think we are a few generations removed from the church doing what the church has always done, and we don't even recognize our mandate to care for the weak/poor anymore. It's one of the tangibles of the faith, but we are left with only the intangible, and I'm wondering - is that it? Is that all? Because, as others have pointed out, social justice comes and goes at whim in politics. And with the 'Americanization' of our society, it is going. The thing is - unlike the church in America, we are used to the 'state' caring for the widows and orphans, and we have washed our hands of them.