A Legacy of Presence: The Enduring Impact of Faith-Based Service

Faith-based organizations have a dynamic history of compassion, innovation, and service—rooted in scripture, shaped by social change, and instrumental in forming the modern nonprofit landscape. In a world marked by growing social complexity, the collaborative and independent roles of these organizations are more necessary than ever to promote human flourishing.

In the early church, the number of disciples was increasing as were their responsibilities in managing their new religious community. In response to a complaint from the Grecian Jews that their widows were being overlooked in the distribution of food, the disciples met to address the concern. They decided to delegate this work: “Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word” (Acts 6: 3-4).

This adaptation due to their specific context, and the delineation of tasks among early Church leaders, signals the central importance of care for the vulnerable that has always been a part of the Christian tradition. Throughout the Old and New Testament God repeatedly communicates His care for the vulnerable, including the widows, orphans, the poor or oppressed and the stranger. Throughout the centuries, the church has been directly and indirectly involved in providing for and caring for the poor and vulnerable.

Over time, the Church’s concern for the vulnerable evolved into structured, institutional efforts to meet physical and social needs through faith-based services. For example, from the earliest days of hospitals and institutions, faith-based organizations have been key actors in social services. Approaches to care and treatment have responded to the changing contexts and realities of each new era. From the Orphan Trains to in-home foster care placements, interventions have adjusted and corrected over time to address inequities and iniquities within various systems. In the19th and 20th century, greater professionalization and formalization led faith-based groups to organize their work into formal nonprofit organizations, which benefit from tax-exempt status.

These organizations, although often initially close to their founding faith traditions, came to be viewed, and often viewed themselves, as independent from those religious foundations. Although many faith-based organizations followed the 20^th century trend toward secularization, others remained rooted and energized by their faith commitments and missions.

Despite their enduring presence, faith-based organizations are often mischaracterized in broader narratives of social welfare history. Although it is often implied that there is an either/or proposition when it comes to government and the voluntary or civil society sector in meeting the needs of the vulnerable; it is a both/and—and always has been. Traditional accounts of social welfare history have often focused on the growth of government involvement with little, if any, attention to the growth of the nonprofit, or civil society, sector.

As a part of civil society, faith-based and community groups doing their thing locally and creatively have always been incredibly important. Many faith-based approaches can provide a more relational approach that focuses on inner transformation and healing as a part of their work with people in need. Faith-based organizations have a distinctive role to play in contributing to the common good. Central in civil society, these organizations are distinct from both the state and the market, and yet interrelated with both (Boris, 2006; Smith, 2010). Boris highlights this dual state: “Nonprofits play prominent social, economic, and political roles in society as service providers, employers and advocates” (2006, p. 2). Essentially, faith-based organizations not only provide crucial social welfare programs but also serve as key contributors to civic engagement and public life.

The nonprofit sector and its role and relationship with the government is difficult to define:

“In various contexts, nonprofits have served as privately supported supplementary service providers of public good, as complementary partners with government in public service provision, and as advocates and adversaries in the process of public policy formulation and implementation. Often, two or three of these roles are manifested simultaneously” (Young, 2006, p. 38, italics added).

To illustrate this point, let’s consider how a faith-based organization might operate within each of these categories.

Complementary: An organization like Bethany Christian Services or Lutheran Social Services partners by way of contract to deliver child welfare or refugee resettlement services. The funding is provided by the government; services are delivered by faith-based organizations. This is common internationally as well where faith-based non-governmental organizations deliver health, nutrition and poverty alleviation services to some of the world’s most vulnerable people.

Supplementary: An organization does something that the government does not do and does not directly fund. Emergency feeding programs and food pantries all fall within this category, as do some transitional housing programs and shelter programs.

Advocacy/Adversarial: Some organizations operate as an advocate or an adversary. Because of their independent status, the organizations can speak up on behalf of the poor and vulnerable, to advocate for policies that will promote greater flourishing. Bread for the World is an example of a Christian advocacy organization that has done this on behalf of poor and hungry people for the past 50 years.

The acknowledgment of the value and diverse relationships of faith-based and community organizations squares quite nicely with Reformed thought on pluralism and public justice.

A principled pluralist framework, as Corwin Smidt (2007) describes it,

“serves to explain and accept the diversity evident in public life, that recognizes different structures of authority that operate within different spheres of social life, and that provides a basis for opposing both totalitarianism and individualism in political life. Thus principled pluralism accepts the state as a social structure possessing legitimate authority within a particular domain of life, but it sees other social structures as possessing legitimate authority within other domains of human and social life. The state is one, but not the only structure to which God has delegated authority” (p. 127).

A legitimate but limited role of government and an acknowledgement of other social structures having legitimate authority in life—these are key elements of the Reformed, pluralist approach. This framework allows its adherents to respect, promote, and even protect diverse actors and religious groups in the public square. It allows its adherents to respect, promote and even protect diverse actors and/or religious groups in the public square. From the pluralist perspective, the development of interdependent relationships in social welfare is not overtly problematic and might be viewed as a positive creational development.

Kuyper and other Reformed thinkers were strong defenders of associational life. In this light, nonprofit organizations can be affirmed as social structures with delegated authority to promote human flourishing. Nonprofit organizations can be considered as holding the middle ground between excessive individualism and an overactive state by promoting organic, collective activity that serves the community. Vanderwoerd, in his article Neo-Calvinist Groundings for Social Work says: “humans are called to develop and utilize social arrangements in a way that is consistent with God’s commands…and in a way that either contributes or detracts from shalom…” He continues, “humans not only build physical things, but also develop social organizations, practices and institutions. Societies evolve and change over time through human imagination and intervention; social forms and entities that exist today did not exist yesterday and may not tomorrow. Such variation is understood to be part of God’s plan for His creation—albeit distorted and stunted by sin and human failing. Nevertheless, the differentiation and development of societies…are not seen as diverging from God’s will, but rather as an unfolding history of God’s kingdom in which humans play a primary role.”

In our current political and social context, it feels even more poignant that we are witnessing the unfolding of history. We aren’t quite sure what we’re looking at yet or where things are headed. The impact of current and potential funding cuts for programs in both international and domestic programs will have real impacts on organizations and the services they are able to provide.

Even so, the longstanding model of differentiated service provision—including faith-based and community organizations—offers hope. These organizations are often agile and mission-driven, making them well-positioned to develop creative responses to emerging needs. As complementary government partnerships become more strained, opportunities may grow for supplementary services and advocacy.

While society continues to grapple with complex social challenges, faith-based organizations remain vital beacons of compassion, innovation, and community—ensuring that care for the vulnerable is not only sustained but deepened for generations to come.