Will the real evangelical Christian please stand up?

I live in the upper Midwest and generally life is quite calm. There is an overarching belief in God and the importance of religion. That having been said, there are also often conflicting views and statements from people that claim the label "evangelical Christian." I would suppose this to be true across the board but I don't live across the board. I live here.

In this Sunday's Grand Forks Herald, see upper Midwest, an editorial appeared that provoked some thought. It was submitted by Milo Mathison. He lives in a community very near to mine. I do not know him personally nor what his denomination of choice is but in his letter to the editor he states a few things that peaked my interest.

The general content of his letter concerned the national and state budget proposals. He bemoans the fact that the cuts that are proposed are not good ones because those cuts are aimed at social programs that benefit the poor. "Our priorities are revealed by those we leave behind" is the last statement in his first paragraph. Skipping down a few well intentioned paragraphs he writes, "As an evangelical Christian, I am deeply concerned about the course our nation is taking. Neglecting the poor and vulnerable, which may be economically justified, is morally indefensible given the abundance of Scripture mandating care for the poor. To assure sufficient revenue to restore quality of life for our vulnerable citizens, taxes must be put on the table."

To most of his argument I will agree and cheer him on especially when he brings God's Word into his thinking with respect to living out the teachings of Scripture with respect to the poor. However!!! he makes a giant leap that cannot be allowed to stand in the same realm of "evangelical" thinking. Mr. Mathison readily turns to Scripture to secure his benevolence but then does not consult or quote or even tip his hat to it when employing government assistance through taxation to the poor. Screeching halt noise.

The Scripture are clear and abundant in their command to help the poor and needy but they are as equally clear on two other issues that effect Mr. Mathison's argument. Nowhere in Scripture does it say that it is the role of government to "provide welfare" to it's citizens. As a matter of point governments are in charge of very little in Scripture. Basically they have legal jurisdiction over criminals in order to keep people safe and military jurisdiction to keep people safe. That's it in a nutshell. The other point that Mr. Mathison et. al. need to consider is that those statements of Scripture that command care for the poor are directed at the Church. It is the Church's responsibility to care for the widows and orphans etc.

Now I agree with Tony Evans when he said, "You can't replace something with nothing" with respect to the hypothetical possibility of discontinuing welfare. The Church, and that includes "evangelical Christians" is woefully unprepared to care for the poor. Why that is true is a matter for future discussion. But Please Mr. Mathison and "evangelical Christians" everywhere if you employ Scripture as your basis for argument please be consistent in your use of it. Thanks.

Peace