The welfare system in the United States, following as it does in every state, the guidelines set up by a federal bureaucracy known as the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), could scarcely have been better designed to destroy families if that had been the singular goal of its ill-advised architects.
The system was developed primarily by feminists and lawyers, and, consequently, it shows a decidedly hostile bent against male headship, the biblical norm for the family. The worst of its problems, however, stems from the fact that it requires those who receive welfare aid to do injury to the familial covenant in several ways. To help those who need a more biblical understanding of this problem then, I offer today's post, which aims to help Christian men and women trying to get by in tough economic times, to enable them to make ends meet without resorting to ungodly means. Providing for one's family (although this is extremely important), never justifies wicked means to obtain righteous ends.
First, let the reader recall that the most fundamental difference between the righteous and the wicked derives from the fact that the former are uniquely holy -- set apart to Christ by their baptismal vow, and the other lawful vows or oaths they have taken. Oaths circumscribe a special set of rights and responsibilities unique to the individual who has taken the oath before God. To keep your oaths, you must walk in holiness -- thoughts, actions and habits consistent with doing what your oaths require -- and, as it is written, "without holiness no one will see the Lord."
The Bible calls Christians "saints," which in biblical Greek reads "hoi hagioi" - literally "the holy ones." Thus, holiness of life separates, and MUST separate Christians from the pagan world. The Bible puts it thus: "Do not be yoked together with unbelievers." The welfare system, having been designed by pagans -- who have no knowledge of (or concern for) holiness -- designed a system which punishes holiness and promotes the violation of one's marital promises -- which can and does in many cases make those PROFANE who stay in it long enough, abiding by its evil terms when they come up against the terms of their marriage vows. It's designers were pragmatists. So here is a brief list and explanation of just how the welfare system tends to profane the marriage oath, and what Christians can and should do about it.
Now, when a woman goes on welfare -- and it is almost always WOMEN who do -- the system gives her money. This creates a dynamic shift in power AWAY from the husband and toward the wife-mother. The money always comes with strings -- and some strings are more dangerous to families than others. What she actually did was to sell something holy -- an integral part of the familial covenant -- to the state as though it were an ordinary commodity -- her husband's duty and right to provide for his own children. Here, the state steps in and begins to replace the husband (in principle). It discourages him from making payments to his wife and family DIRECTLY by punishing her with a potential reduction in monthly stipend if she accepts it -- and mandates that she report it. He has to make payments to the collection agency of the welfare department -- euphemistically called "Child Support." Thus, the state becomes the economic intermediary situated between husband and wife -- exercising in some cases an extraordinary degree of fiscal control over the family so tied to the welfare system. Local bureaucrats (many of whom are women) -- and for whom no one voted -- now wield power (by threat of legal force) over the husband as well, not just the wife-mother.
The label "Child Support" is something of an Orwellian misnomer since his children continue receiving money from welfare whether he repays the debt or not. It is county support and welfare system support. But the state (and perhaps the wife-mother if she works), not the husband, now provides for the children. He is actually prevented from supporting his own children in the name of "child support." She has been deceived into thinking she has done a good thing -- to provide for her family -- but at an unholy expense. Jesus commanded, "Do not give to the dogs what is holy; neither cast your pearls to swine." Bottom line: It is not lawful to sell the husband's familial obligations to care for his children, any more than it is lawful to sell his wife's conjugal rights to some other woman. Rights emerging from covenants (not mere contracts) are in the nature of the case EXCLUSIVE, and not for sale. To sell them is profane.
A man's marital and familial obligations in the Bible are holy, as these arise from the marriage covenant, the oath he took on the day of his wedding. All such holy duties of his come with corresponding rights. It is his RIGHT -- not merely his duty -- to provide for his family in whatever lawful and ethical manner he sees fit. Once the wife-mother chooses the state as provider, she has begun to replace her husband with another man -- represented by the state. For the state gives her ALL (100% of) the subsidy and exclusive custody over the children, making the family a one-parent family in principle. He inherits 100% of the liability -- there is no 50-50 split here. The state has just forced the husband out of the familial circle and is free to tyrannize him at length, unless, of course he
1. is able to land a rather high-paying job, or 2. has the unlikely, but quite helpful, knowledge of how to create a corporation (and put his money into a corporate account)or 3. to employ some other protective investment vehicle (e.g. an irrevocable trust) to shield his assets from being sucked into the welfare-CSS vortex.
Yet the wife-mother remains altogether immune from such threats from the start.
The wife does not know it, of course, but the state just "helped" her into a divorce (in principle), with no biblical cause, as though she jettisoned her husband to rescue her children. This is (in principle) the ungodly divide built into the strings referred to earlier. This is, of course, the reverse of biblical priorities: her covenant vow is to Christ (represented by the husband) first, and THEN to the children. This is NOT the feminist view. He now falls under the jurisdiction of a tyrant, having been sold into slavery for a (regular) bowl of stew for the rest of the family. This also leaves her open for another man to move into the marital picture (for marriage, being a creation ordinance, abhors a vacuum just like nature) -- while her husband is kept under by the oppressive requirements of the state. This is "bricks without straw." The state can take up to half of his salary, removing most of what he earns so he cannot get ahead of the game enough to get his family out of the welfare pit. The state also frequently imposes an exorbitant interest rate (10% in CA) -- thus reducing further his ability to provide for his family at just the time he needs to provide MORE to get them off welfare.
This is how welfare self-perpetuates. It pays the wife to help the state overburden (and even attack by way of litigation) her husband. If he cannot get work, the extremely unconstitutional "quasi-criminal" court case he will face -- the charge for non-payment in which (if he cannot find work) -- comes with the name "contempt of court." He no longer has the presumption of innocence in such a case, but must prove he has diligently tried to find work to stave off jail time. But if he spends the time necessary to manage the paperwork this requires, he will incur the wrath of those around him as someone who should be out jobhunting instead. The label "deadbeat," no matter how unfair or wrong, will trample his good name.
To further these shennanigans, state laws circumvent (where this means "steamroller") U.S. constitutional law by simply creating a class of cases unknown at the time the constitution was written, today called: "quasi-criminal" litigation. This will also give her husband a criminal record and a bad name, further decapitalizing him. Here, the state uses a new procedure to simply ignore the bill of rights because -- you will be told -- some of these do not apply in "quasi-criminal cases" (which obviously shows such litigation unconstitutional).
Thus the welfare system:
1. Belittles the marriage covenant (which is holy, and not common), treating it as though it were a mere business contract, where a person can buy or sell the rights arising from this "contract" to get money.
2. It gives all the family assets over to the woman, including the children, eliminating the man from the picture by burdening him beyond his capabilities (the legal term is "undue burden"). The Bible calls this "crushing the poor." It often comes with usury also.
3. This can turn the husband and wife against each other, especially if he didn't want to assume the obligation -- this has the "divide and conquer" effect upon the family.
4. This also tempts each to look elsewhere to get their needs met -- promoting divorce and adultery -- both of which God hates -- the violating of their marriage vows. This also begins to put an end to the progress of sanctification in the household, in favor of sinful habits and attitudes, since the wife no longer will look to her husband as the one who properly is to promote her sanctification. Thus, she begins to look elsewhere for a spiritual leader, completely unaware that she just disregarded the biblically-appointed guardian of her spiritual well-being. A wolf -- to be sure well-dressed in sheep's clothing -- will happily oblige her search apart from her husband.
5. The DHHS and states keep no statistics on the state welfare departments; for if they did, it would be easily demonstrable that only men go to jail (almost never women) over non-payment of child support. The whole system is hostile to male headship and discriminates against them in the extreme. Hence the lack of record-keeping. This removes an obvious legal defense for men in court based on the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.
6. It leaves the man and woman exposed to others that Satan can (and will) bring into their lives who will promise to fulfill the needs left unfulfilled after he has turned them against each other.
These are easy to spot. To the woman, they come with "authority" and defame her husband eagerly and aggressively, with highly uncharitable accusations both true and false. They always promise "security and money," emphasizing her duty to her children while downplaying and denying her responsibility to her husband. The role is almost a cliche in motion.
Of course, we all already know how Satan attacks the men -- with women. Just see the examples of Adam, David and Solomon in the Bible. First, he uses the wife against her husband (to "help" her children out of a father and spiritual leader), and then he brings other women -- pretty ones, smart ones -- whichever he likes the best -- to try to get him to meet his sexual needs outside the marriage covenant. This is age-old stuff -- same song, eight-hundredth verse.
How to Save Your Family From Disaster.
1. Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. This means get rid of all forms of government assistance that obligate your husband or family to the state. It simply is not the job of the state to provide this way anyhow, but the obligation and responsibility of private charities. This may be difficult, since women quite naturally crave security for their families, and this may seem the "only way" to provide for your family at the moment. Don't judge by appearances, but by the Word of God. Biblical faith often involves risk. Esther's faith welled up in the act of submitting to her God-ordained authority, Mordecai, and she said, "If I perish, I perish." When you notify the welfare department that you no longer need their "services," be prepared for everyone in the world to try to talk you back into the system. They won't let you go without a contest of wills. Be firm in your resistance. Remember, the kindness of the wicked is but cruelty in disguise.
2. Wives, this may not be easy either, but adopt an attitude of charity -- not hostility -- toward your husband. Judge him favorably. The better part of charity is what is called "empathy" -- walking a mile or two in his shoes -- as we say. Charity is the most essential of all christian virtues. Without it all is lost, since charity is the basis for building up family, church and society. This is especially important in the family since a woman's husband is the most immediate representative to her of Jesus Christ the Lord on earth -- not the Church and not the state -- her husband. Hence also his significant level of responsibility in this office.
This is why the passage (cited below) says "AS TO THE LORD." Marriage is the basis for church and state, but the converse is not true. No minister of church or state, therefore, has lawful authority to dissolve a marriage without conclusive proof and due process IN COURT where the accused may answer the charges against him -- that a man has either physically deserted his family or committed adultery. "What God has joined together, let no man separate." Thus, a wife is duty-bound to help her husband in everything to fulfill his covenant vows to her and her children. She is not free to stand idly by and require him to do it alone -- a form of dereliction of duty on her part.
Women put in a position of power over their husbands (unlawfully, by the state) will often find that when they start giving him orders (rather, say, than helping him find work) he will resent this. This is because she is not properly appointed by God (or anyone else) to give orders to her husband, but to help him fulfill his oaths. The Bible says, "Wives submit yourselves to your husbands in everything AS TO THE LORD." This, of course, is NOT the feminist view.
If she tries to impose some sort of negative sanction against him, she simply makes herself an insubordinate. She is "de-sanctifying" herself, denying an essential characteristic of her God-given femininity, and transgressing her marital vow. He (God and the husband) will see this as mutiny, which is what it is. If she continues the mutiny, she will eventually become apostate (total, permanent de-sanctification), for her rebellion is not merely against her husband, but against the source of his authority -- Jesus Christ. This is not doormat theology; it comes straight from Genesis and the New Testament. And everyone is subordinate to someone -- The head of the woman is the man, and the head of the man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God. the woman is no more a doormat for being a willing help-mate subordinate than the man is a doormat for submitting to the Word of Christ.
Feminists will, of course, hate this saying (which virtually proves that it's true), but no man or woman can show it other than the biblical position. Thus, step one for a woman to save her household is to recall what she knows of the basics of the Bible, and start doing them.
3. Wives will find their husbands far more eager to serve them when the husband sees that she wants to help him. Accusations typically only bring counter-accusations -- the chief of which will be insubordination. Wives are never supposed to accuse their husbands -- ever. Constructive criticism -- to help your husband -- is appropriate when you are alone, but not accusations. A woman who accuses her husband aims to dominate him (whether she realizes this or no) which tends to undo (in a contradictory fashion) everything she liked about his masculinity when she married him in the first place.
4. Wives should stop listening to their husbands accusers/ detractors, and reject their accusations. Defend his good name the way you would want him to defend yours if others accused you behind your back. Try your best to overlook his faults and do what you can to compensate for them (if anything).
5. Pray and sing psalms together. Have confidence that God will really help when the two of you work together. Talk openly with your husband and form a plan of action TOGETHER as to what each of you can do to work together as a team to provide for your household. Discuss all the possible resources available (minus the state's "help") and the Christian people who might help you -- and write it out on paper. Perhaps your church, or other non-profit organizations, can help. For some strange reason, immigrants who come to the U.S. seem much more aware of the need to exert community efforts than native-borns, who prefer the highly individualistic route. The Bible says, "A cord of three strands is not easily broken."
6. Have the children play an active role in praying for the parents, and for God to bless their sanctified familial efforts. Never underestimate the efficacy of a child's prayer. God loves the covenant children -- even the ones who aren't adults yet.
Praise the Lord, for he is good; his mercy endures forever.
To begin your own research on the leviathan welfare system, you may want to start here.
http://www.reason.com/0402/fe.mw.injustice.shtml
Carson Day has written some 1.3 gazillion articles, with insightful (if alternative) viewpoints. He specialized in the history of ideas in college, and has been quoted as saying "What box?" He remains at large despite the best efforts of the civil authorities. To see Carson's blogs visit: http://ophirgold.blogspot.com or http://extremeprofit.blogspot.com