Wednesday, February 01, 2006

Separation of church and state: the flip side

Spent a good deal of time with The Bossman today at my house. During some of our business ramblings I sought counsel in formation of The Table, particularly in the arena of what I consider government intrusion.

I am not a right-winged nut. I am not a member of the Republic of Texas, living in the foothills near Ft. Davis and refusing to recognize the State of Texas as my government or anything like that. I just want to build relationships with the poor of the fair mother city and possibly use food and various resources as a means to do so. And I don't want any government intrusion to trip me up along the way.

There is a huge grey area in which I've been long confused. Restaraunts in our city (like all cities) must pass a scheduled health inspection by a local governing authority. Any place that serves food to the public must pass certain guidelines. Understood. Churches with kitchens are not under these guidelines as they don't serve the public, just their members. I have no intention of exposing the exclusive nature of churches (serving only its members), but rather stating that I fully agree that churches shouldn't have to go under a governmental guideline. Because they are the church. And everyone in this day and age screams "separation of church and state". This phrase is usually mentioned when religious people step into the government's business. But church kitchen inspection would clearly show the opposite: government getting into the church's business.

Although 99% of churches in the US give the government free reign over them by selling out to non-prof status of 501(c)3 or even the lesser used 508(c)1a (corporation sole). But I ain't about to enter that subject. Not on this post.

So my big question is...if a gathering place called The Table is created in the future, and by biblical definition it becomes a church, and this church is the kind of church that feeds people in a cafe with no pulpit-type preaching or bulletins to pass out...does The Table need government run health inspections?

The Table would have nothing to hide. I would want it to have above standard operations as a mark of the CEO's excellence. But I really don't want the government to have a foothold in it. Or an invisible leash around our necks.

This happened at the old izzy ministry with the original version of The Table. Things were going well for months. Then the city discovered we were feeding 20-30 people every weekday without their official "OK", so they shut us down for a week or so until we had their inspection.

I want to render to Ceasar and all that jazz. I don't care if others label me a rogue, but I don't want to be one. Rogues are always self-centered and prideful.

I had originally thought of avoiding the city government by calling The Table a church and having folks sign a "membership" list before getting food. This is a church. These are its members. Period. The folks could renounce their membership on the way out after eating for all I care. The Bossman reminded me of a former church in the fair mother city that had a school that the city shut down. It got pretty ugly because the church was trying to fight back via the media and other worldly ways.

Another alternative The Bossman suggested was getting a house in a depressed residential area and outfitting the kitchen and living room to be The Table. And perhaps have me living in the house or letting someone else live there. Thus, it would be a residence and the government can't regulate how many people come to my house to eat and hang out for community.

The ideas are endless. Does anyone have more suggestions or words of advice?

4 comments:

Mike Murrow said...

well, i think the render unto ceaser thing applies here.

what could it hurt?

or you could form a new religion and claim that eating the meal is part of the worship (not far from the bibles take on eating btw).

what would be the prob with just obeying the civil authorities in this case?

Agent B said...

probably nothing. But getting shut down for a week (for no apparent reason other than their slowness and flaunting their power) left a bad taste in my mouth.

That and I'm not gung-ho on govt/church alliances. But maybe I need to get over it, lest I turn into a nut or something.

Agent B said...

...and after a few more thoughts...

I jst don't get it. Why should a church that feeds homeless people be inspected when a church with members-only pot lucks don't??

The Table at the old izzy days evolved out of thin air. We didn't "plan" a soup kitchen. We just started eating meals with some guys who camped out on our porch and it went from there. Before we knew it, we had a full blown lunch cafe gig. Call us ignorant, but we never thought to get the city's OK. Because cooking in the kitchen and eating is what we'd be doing at home, with pot lucks after church, or with the guys from the porch. What was the difference.

When the city came in, they never would explain (or show a written law) the difference. They just closed us until we cried uncle.

I'm willing to obey the law to the fullest. But I'm also willing to be an asshole fighting for the poor, if the city wants to make something of it.

Will Spina said...

Interesting points. Satan always opposses or just makes difficult any intrusion that we may make into his keeping people oppressed. The Table sounds like a decent idea. I am on the board of a children's camp and sometime we run into similar difficulties with our good works... The gospel is best shared around a table, always has been, and still in my preferred method of communication. Blessings to your endeavor...