In our studies on the local work of the church we have looked at benevolence, evangelism, and the application of Bible authority.  Now, we are going to look at Benevolent Institutions such as Orphan Homes and if the local church can scripturally support these Institutions from it’s treasury.

As we have been learning about the work of the church, we have found that the pattern of benevolence involving the church treasury has always been church to saint.  After examining all the passages typically used on benevolence, we have found that the individual Christian has a role to help all men (Matthew 25:31-46, Galatians 6:10, etc.).  Now comes along a question that could either go along with what we have learned, or change what we have learned.  The question being: “Can the local church aid non-Christian widows and orphans from it’s treasury?”  If we find that the local church cannot help non-Christian widows and orphans then we will be able to conclude it could not build, maintain, oversee, or support orphan homes as well.  That is deductive reasoning.

The passage that is used by those affirming that the church can use it’s treasury to aid non-Christian orphans and widows is James 1:27.  James 1:27 reads: “Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.”  This verse tells us that it is pure and undefiled religion to help the orphans and widows.  The how is to “visit” them.  What does the word visit mean in this passage?  The Greek word here is “episkeptomai” (which is Strongs’ # 1980).  Thayer defines this word as:

“1) to look upon or after, to inspect, examine with the eyes
1a) in order to see how he is, i.e. to visit, go to see one
1a1) the poor and afflicted, the sick
1b) to look upon in order to help or to benefit
1b1) to look after, have care for, provide for: of God
1c) to look (about) for, look out (one to choose, employ, etc.)”

The immediate context of James 1:27 would be the preceding passage.  James 1:26 states: “If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain.”  So, if we follow contextual grammar we would all have to agree that the “who” is the man in verse 26, not a local church.  It is the “himself” or “oneself” in James 1:27, that is to be unspotted from the world.  To put the church collectively into James 1:27 we would have to do away with the context.  The context points to the individual.  If we back up to James 1:21 we see even more clearly that the context is talking of individuals being doers of the word, not hearers only.  Keep following our study and see how the other factors we are examining will make the issue even clearer.  Let’s look at the pattern on “how” widows were cared for by the local church.

Those promoting James 1:27 usually do so to promote the care of orphans and to explain why they believe there is authority to build, maintain, oversee, and support children’s homes.  What they do not like to do is to take a look at the widow portion of James 1:27.  The reason they do not like to do so is because there is a pattern for how the church is to care for widows collectively from the treasury.  That pattern does not support the theory that the church could build, maintain, oversee, and support orphan homes for non-Christian children.  Let’s look at some questions and apply passages to them.

What widows can be cared for by the church collectively?

1. Non-Christian widows?: NO VERSE TO SUPPORT THAT CONCLUSION.

2. QualifiedFaithfulElderly Christian Widows?: YES.  (I Timothy 5:3; 5-6; 9-15) “3. Honour widows that are widows indeed.  5. Now she that is a widow indeed, and desolate, trusteth in God, and continueth in supplications and prayers night and day.  6. But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.  10. Well reported of for good works; if she have brought up children, if she have lodged strangers, if she have washed the saints’ feet, if she have relieved the afflicted, if she have diligently followed every good work.  11. But the younger widows refuse: for when they have begun to wax wanton against Christ, they will marry; 12. Having damnation, because they have cast off their first faith.  13. And withal they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not.  14. I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.  15. For some are already turned aside after Satan.”

3. Those Qualified Faithful Elderly Christian Widows who have no one else to care for them?: EXACTLY, YES (I Timothy 5:16) “If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve them that are widows indeed.”

So, does that make some restrictions on James 1:27?  Sure, it shows more and more that the individual is the one who is to care for the widows and the orphans.  If it were the local church collectively in James 1:27 then James and Paul were on two separate pages on this issue.  Yet, since they were guided by the same Spirit (John 16:13 and II Timothy 3:16-17) that is not the problem.  The problem is that some brethren want to make the church like the denominations we see around us.  The local church has a limited role in helping the needy from it’s treasury.  The Bible shows that role to be destitute saints and widows indeed.  Now there is one more area of study that should make this “as clear as day”.  We will examine the words in James 1:27.

The word visit has been defined earlier in this study.  Those who teach that the church may build, maintain, oversee, and support orphan homes and other benevolent Institutions have built their argument around the word visit.  It describes what is to be done for the orphans and widows.  What those holding this erring position do not do is remain consistent.  The same word translated as “visit” in James 1:27 also appears in Matthew 25:43.  Notice this passage: “I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.”  Now, why do those advocating the building of orphan homes fail to see that they would also have to build hotels, clothing stores, prisons, and hospitals?  After all, it is the same word used that they hinge their argument of orphan homes on.  Consistency is demanded when scriptures are properly applied.  Now, to those that know the truth, we know that Matthew 25:43 and James 1:27 do not apply to the local church collectively, but to the saints individually.  We know that as individual Christians we are to help “all men” in need as we have opportunity (Galatians 6:10).

It is then argued that if the church cannot help widows and orphans via James 1:27, then the church cannot practice pure and undefiled religion.  That statement is false in it’s premise.  The church is made up of individual Christians (I Corinthians 12:27).  As individual Christians we can help the orphans and the widows per James 1:27.  The point is not “can the church do it” it is how can the church do it?  The church can practice pure religion undefiled before God as individual Christians and thus the church has practiced pure and undefiled religion as a distributive action.  The body of Christ is already pure and undefiled by it’s nature and existence (Ephesians 5:27).

Finally, can the local church be “unspotted from the world” if it does not aid non-Christian orphans and widows from it’s treasury?  Again, the basic premise of the question is wrong.  The church is by it’s nature and existence unspotted by the world.  The church is pure (Ephesians 5:27).  The church is made up of those whom are leaving the world through conversion and that are added to the church by obeying the Gospel (Colossians 1:13, Acts 2:47, I Corinthians 12:12-13, Galatians 3:27, and Mark 16:15-16).  The church is the opposite of the world.  The church is made up of those who are the saved (Ephesians 5:23).  We have looked at the terms used by those advocating the local church having a role in aiding the non-Christian orphan and widow through it’s treasury.  We have found that those terms do not mean what the Institutional position needs them to mean based upon their arguments.  The local church collectively is not addressed in James 1:27.

Since it is not a work of the local church to collectively provide for non-Christian widows and orphans it cannot be a work of the local church to aid the Institutions that care for orphans and widows.  There is no clearer way of understanding the issue.  The local church is not the provider for those in need in a collective way.  We as individual Christians have a role to help those in need (Galatians 6:10).  That is the clear pattern of benevolence in the New Testament.  We cannot violate what God has instructed through His clear pattern.  We need authority to be pleasing to God (Colossians 3:17).  There is no authority to build, maintain, oversee, or support any human institution.  If it were a good idea, a commanded idea, or an inferred idea we surely would have seen an example of this in the New Testament.  After all, God has provided all that we need to know (II Peter 1:3).  In conclusion, I want to show the Institutional argument and let it primarily defeat itself.

Dan Goddard of the church of Christ in Garden City, MI, which is an Institutional congregation, says this about the Orphan Home Issue and James 1:27:

“James 1:27 gives us a definition of pure religion, which includes "visiting the fatherless and widows" and that means providing care for them.  The church can help needy widows (First Timothy 5:16).  It can also help needy children (James 1:27).  What kind of church is it that cannot practice pure religion?  Surely that is not the Lord's church that is so prohibited.  To provide for the homeless simply means there must be a home provided. The church is not a home; does not do the work of a home; is not designed or organized to be a home.  God ordained the church and He also ordained the home.  The two are separate.  When there is no home, the church does not become the home, but must provide a home.  That is all it can do. This includes provision of food, shelter, clothing, medicine, guidance, care, love, recreation, education, etc. all the duties that belong to the home.”  (Bolds added B.A.Y.)  The whole article can be view on the web at this address:
http://www.garden-city-coc.org/sermons/church207.htm