And There Was No Poor Among Them

In recent weeks my thoughts have turned to the subject of poverty.  This has come about for two reasons. The first is because I am teaching a social welfare policy course this semester.  As many of you may know the social work profession, like many fields of social science, promotes quite liberal social and economic philosophy.  The author of the text book we are using this semester (I did not choose it) is unabashedly socialist.  The content of the course explores social problems and policies in the United States from education to health care to welfare.  We examine the history of these problems and policies, discuss policies currently in place to address social problems, and explore potential policies for the future.  I have always been a bit of a political junkie but I would not fancy myself a policy wonk.  My interest in teaching social work at the university level has much more to do with the areas of clinical practice than it does with the areas of policy, especially since the field has such a strong liberal bias.  Nevertheless, I am interested in policy and view it as an important domain for personal awareness and knowledge.  And, let's face it, I have to teach the courses they tell me to teach and I'm at the bottom of the totem pole right now!  Anyway, in preparing for and teaching the course I have been compelled to reflect seriously on the matter of poverty in our country and the policies that do, could, and should address it.

The second trigger for this current stream of thought is the presidential election.  Two weeks ago a video was released to the media of our very own Mitt Romney making some remarks that seem to disparage the economically disadvantaged, or at least give the impression that Mitt is not concerned about them.  This, of course, added to his already villainized image of a rich white guy with no capacity to relate to the common man.  I disagree with the characterization, created and perpetuated by the Democrats and the media, of Mitt Romney the unfeeling capitalist looking out only for the wealthy.  But then, I also disagree with the characterization of the President as Barak Obama the evil socialist out to destroy America, as painted by Republicans and conservative talk radio.  I think what Mitt was trying to say is that there is a certain percentage of Americans who are stuck in a victim mentality, which leads to a sense of entitlement that the government (and everyone else for that matter) owes them something.  Some of these folks become dependent on government welfare programs and are therefore drawn to the parties and candidates that talk about preserving and expanding those programs.  He seemed to be making the point that nothing he says in his campaign is going to change that.  Anyone who has worked in social services or mental health cannot deny the reality of this type of paradigm.  However, Mitt said that it was 47% of the country and he said he didn't care about them.  He is now working hard to correct his lack of accuracy and eloquence.  Of course, 47% of the population are not dependent on government handouts and certainly 47% do not have a victim mentality.  Furthermore, not all of those who DO receive assistance have a victim mentality either.

Enter Harry Reid, also one of our own, who later thought he would take political advantage of the situation and chimed in by saying that Mitt Romney had "sullied" Mormonism.  Harry, a good man and faithful Latter-day Saint, is heavily liberal in his political leanings.  In fact, he attributes his liberalism to his Mormonism in his oft-repeated statement, "I am a Democrat because I am a Mormon."  It should be fairly noted that Mitt has made plenty of negative comments about the Honorable Gentleman from Nevada too.  Thus disappointingly, the conservative Mormon heavy weight and the progressive Mormon heavy weight throw political jabs at one another over what really comes down to questions about the government's role in attending to the poor and the needy.

I have written before about my views related to our political behavior as Latter-day Saints (click here).  As saints we are called to avoid "doubtful disputations" (Rom. 14:1).  It is one thing to debate the issues and it is quite another to trash character and judge another's standing in, or relationship to, our faith based off his or her political opinions.  The Church has repeatedly stated, "The Church does...expect its members to engage in the political process in an informed and civil manner, respecting the fact that members of the Church come from a variety of backgrounds and experiences and may have differences of opinion in partisan political matters."  The Church's official position on political participation also notes, "Elected officials who are Latter-day Saints make their own decisions and may not necessarily be in agreement with one another or even with a publicly stated Church position...These officials still must make their own choices based on their best judgment and with consideration of the constituencies whom they were elected to represent" (see here). Let us not, as Latter-day Saints or as human beings for that matter, allow political rhetoric from any direction of the spectrum, even among our own membership, to distract us from the call and the goal to be of "one heart and one mind" as a people (Moses 7:18).  Calling into question someone's worth and faithfulness or questioning their commitment to the gospel because of a differing political position is nothing less than religious manipulation.  I observed it at my neighborhood caucus meeting earlier this year between the Ron Paul supporters and the Mitt Romney supporters.  It came from both sides and it was less than impressive. 

Returning to the issue of poverty.  There is another call and another goal, in conjunction with the scriptural mandate to be of one heart and one mind, for which we are commanded to strive.  It is the goal to have no poor among us (Moses 7:18).  It was the political conversation described above, and the Mormon as well as national reaction to it, that propelled my thoughts about the topic of poverty further along.  What are my views on the poor?  How should they be treated and assisted?  How should I address the issue as an individual?  How should we address it as a society?  What should the role of government be?  These have been some of the questions swirling about in my mind.  

I am of the view that the spiritual and religious doctrines to which I subscribe should guide my political thought and positions.  That is, instead of using the philosophies of men and the world to influence my political stance and behavior, as much as possible I want to use the gospel of Jesus Christ to influence my positions and actions.  This is not always possible, as the Lord has not spoken out on every issue.  It seems to me that often He deals more in broader doctrines and leaves the rest to us to identify principles and govern ourselves accordingly.  Furthermore, there can be different interpretations of gospel principles that lead to different political and policy conclusions (see statement above).  Now I fully recognize that my own perception is at times skewed and distorted because of my human nature, which has a blinding effect upon me.  I am not always right and I certainly do not claim to always be on the side of God in matters political (if God chooses a side).  However, I do try to be thoughtful, prayerful, informed, and studious.  I do try to determine a political position that is most aligned with the teachings of Jesus and His ordained servants as I understand them, versus a political ideology or party platform.  I am not suggesting this is the only way to guide political life, but I do believe that it is a wise way.  I accept that others may view things differently.  I also accept that others may come to different political conclusions after having gone through the same process of striving to pattern positions after principles of eternal truth.  Though there may be disagreement, somehow I feel like in such situations there is greater opportunity to come together to create workable and agreeable solutions.  But, I digress once again.  

Ultimately, I decided that I needed to do some spiritual studying and pondering about the topic of poverty.  Having studied the various philosophies of men, my objective was to discover to the best of my understanding the doctrines and principles set forth by the Lord and His servants related to the poor and needy, and in the process answer the questions I have been posing to myself as described above.  My writing here is a way for me to synthesize and solidify the insights gained for myself, and perhaps share something of value with those few who read this as well.

I began with a study of the scriptures.  There are 326 references to the word "poor" in the Standard Works.  I read every single one.  Of course, some of those are not speaking about economic poverty, instead they refer to being "poor in heart" or other spiritual concepts.  My study of these references included gaining context and in some cases consulting cross references, other versions of the Bible, commentaries, and Hebrew and Greek concordances.  I also read the 30 references to the word "poverty" and the 74 references to the word "needy".  In addition, I studied numerous references in the scriptures to government, tax, liberty, welfare, and charity.  Following my study of the scriptures I turned to the words of the living prophets.  I read dozens of statements and discourses from Brigham Young to Marion G. Romney to Dieter F. Uchtdorf.  As a side note, the study notebook feature on LDS.org was extraordinarily helpful in organizing the information.  All of this was pursued with efforts toward prayerful contemplation so as to invite the impressions of the Spirit.  It has been a fascinating, inspiring, and surprising endeavor.  The search resulted in a confirmation of some of my understanding, but it also challenged some of my understanding and brought new perspective and nuance to my thoughts and feelings.  I would encourage all to take a similar journey.  What you find might surprise you.

I have not mapped anything out, but I think I will take this in parts, otherwise it will be too long.   I should note at the outset that I have a bias, which is probably already quite clear to those of you who know me.  First, I completely believe and embrace the doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Second, I am  politically conservative and a registered Republican.  I am not, however, a hard right-winger, probably not really even a tea-partier (mostly as a statement of tone more than principle).  I'd like to consider myself more of a pragmatist than an ideologue.  

 I know that poverty is not a particularly exciting topic, nor is it very uplifting, but I am a nerd and I am a social worker, so these are the kinds of posts I create, I guess. What I can say is that from everything I have studied, this is a topic of extraordinary import to our Father.  If only it were for us!

"Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.  Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked." (Psalms 82:3-4).

"The place to begin is to familiarize ourselves with what the Lord has already revealed. We should not assume that we know. We need to approach the subject with the humility of a child. Every generation must learn anew the doctrines that undergird the Lord’s way of caring for the needy." (Dieter F. Uchtdor, Providing in the Lord's Way, Ensign, Nov. 2011).