Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Special Student Discount for WORLD!
Humility regarding what man does. Faith in what God does. That means skepticism about politicians' plans to run health care.
Click to Print
Include Comments
115,000 souls
Someone declared November National Adoption Month, though you wouldn’t know it from reading The Washington Post or The New York Times. This article in the Christian Examiner does a nice job of laying out the particulars with regards to Christian efforts, and notes this stinging essay by Covenant Seminary professor Anthony Bradley, subtitled: “Why Does America Have Orphans If It Has Christian Churches?” Bradley asks:
“The Washington Times reports that there are about 65 million evangelicals in America. So . . . why are there 115,000 orphans in America’s foster care system? Does this mean that there are 65 million people missing huge sections of their Bibles?”
There are many ways to look after orphans. One can give to mercy missions, for example, or volunteer in schools. No doubt many of us are in good faith doing as the Bible — in more than one place — admonishes. At the same time, Bradley’s numbers are compelling. Out of 65 million professing evangelicals, is there no slack, no extra room, no additional time and faith, to house 115,000 children? Taking in an orphan needn’t be an individual family’s burden, either. Churches — meaning we fellow believers — can provide funds to help with costly adoption proceedings, as well as other resources, like babysitting help. Is there no room left at our tables?
The numbers sit there as a rebuke, don’t they? 65 million evangelicals, and a greater number of professing Christians, all of us with our Bibles instructing us to care for orphans, yet the average child in foster care, according to the Christian Examiner, waits four years to be adopted, while many never find a home at all. Though a great many Americans report considering adoption, no more than two percent actually do. I couldn’t find any percentages for Christians, but do you think our adoption numbers are any higher? Should they be?
Think what a testimony it would be, if Christians gave our all to ensure that no child went without a permanent home. That kind of behavior, more than electing any politician, or passing any law, will be what changes culture, and declares — in action rather than words — what it means to follow Christ.
back to top53 Comments to “115,000 souls”
Don’t be so quick to blame the 65 million.
During the time when my wife & I couldn’t have children, we began the process of adoption.
As Christians we felt strongly that we should open our hearts & home to orphans.
“Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction…” – James 1:27
One of the meanings of the word translated “to visit” is ‘to look after, provide for’.
So we tried, not even choosing to go the route of trying to adopt an infant. But we soon learned that the definition of ‘orphan’ was not so simple.
Some children in foster care have parents or other guardian family members who are trying desperately to get their children back.
Others are there with no chance to go home, but are not adoptable for many different reasons.
Then there are those whose biological families are either unable or unwilling to care for them because of a handicap, or emotional/mental disease, or low socioeconomic status.
Then there are the true orphans, whose parents are dead, but whose extended families cannot take them in, or who do nnot have any extended family.
We looked at books, literal books full of photos & short bios of needy children of all kinds. Older sisters (14-18), whose self-written bio said, “We only want to have a family with whom we can share birthdays, and holidays, and who will love us.”
Or little ‘Sammy’, with his 7 year-old head tilted ever so cutely to the side in his photo, just wanting to be loved by someone special.
The list goes on and on and on…..
We researched the issues, prayed about what we were willing to do to help, & who we felt the Lord wanted us to adopt.
After several frustrating years of being willing to accept orphans of ANY kind: family groups, handicapped (physical, mental, etc.), bi/multi-racial, family groups of multi-racial handicapped children — not a joke, as we “put in for” many children with problems of all types — we found that the system was not as willing to place ‘orphans’ as their press would lead you to believe.
We were either from the wrong state, the wrong ethnic/racial group, the wrong socioeconomic level, the wrong you-name-it.
We learned that children who are wards of a government agency are a financial gain to the agency in whose care they reside. If a child is placed, the state does not receive funding (federal, state?) for that child.
It was a cold, harsh wake-up call for a young couple willing to love whoever the Lord would bring our way.
This is not to say that some of the placement workers were not caring individuals who truly wished to place children. They were often stymied by the regulations imposed upon them. Many of them were frustrated & broken-hearted that the children in their case files were still without families.
So, that there are 65 million self-proclaimed evangelicals in America, yet still 115,000 children in foster care is not a surprise.
It might not be the fault of the 65 million.
Report comment to moderator
Why do I detect from this article a spirit of “There oughta be a law”?
Report comment to moderator
Sorry Bianca, I’m a little thick-headed about my own intentions. Could you enlighten me about what it is I meant in this spirit you’ve discerned?
Report comment to moderator
and notes this stinging essay by Covenant Seminary professor Anthony Bradley, subtitled: “Why Does America Have Orphans If It Has Christian Churches?” Bradley asks:
“The Washington Times reports that there are about 65 million evangelicals in America. So . . . why are there 115,000 orphans in America’s foster care system? Does this mean that there are 65 million people missing huge sections of their Bibles?”
And just how many kids has Bradley adopted?
Zero.
I wonder what sections of his Bible are missing? Evidently the part about motes and beams, for one.
Report comment to moderator
And, Tony, can your or anyone please square this with Bradley’s most recent column here on WoW?
The one where he talks about how “suburban” parents are cruelly condemning their own biological children to years and years of counseling, even into their 30s, by their horrible parenting?
So Bradley believes that millions of “suburban” Christian parents are scarring their own children for life. And yet these same people should be adopting more kids to harm them?
So, “suburban” Christian parents are doing a terrible job of raising kids and should be doing it to even more kids?
Makes sense to me, Tony.
Report comment to moderator
#1: During the time when my wife & I couldn’t have children, we began the process of adoption.
Ok, 64,999,998 NOT 65,000,000.
If you are against abortion and you can support a child, then you should be supporting a child. Make abortion unnecessary.
Report comment to moderator
I would imagine his hope is that good parents adopt orphans. I would have thought that might have been fairly evident.
Perhaps we could conduct a study, and get an estimate of what percentage of self-professing Christians are actually good parents, and then send out a special exhortation just to them, with the caveat that adoption in some cases will be difficult, and that they should not feel guilty, really, for not trying, because there are anecdotes about people who tried in good faith and were thwarted.
Oh, and we should be sure that only those who have adopted do the exhorting. And before anyone asks, no, my family has not adopted yet. We have four small children, and have talked about doing it when our children are older, if that reduces my hypocrisy score any.
The more I think about it, perhaps we could niggle about the system, and one another’s righteousness, and the hidden intentions of one another, and maybe that will make the world better. It certainly makes all of us feel better about things, doesn’t it?
Report comment to moderator
That’s right Tony, you wouldn’t know it by reading the Washington Post … unless you, you know, actually read the Washington Post.
Report comment to moderator
I saw it when I did my search on the Post and Times websites, Steve, in full anticipation that someone like you would be there to play “GOTCHA!”
I don’t think a paragraph four mention in an article about something entirely different, however, counts as coverage of National Adoption Month, do you? Which is why I felt comfortable with the opening sentence to my post.
Report comment to moderator
#1: I can sympathize with your situation. My family has been trying to adopt two children from Haiti for three years now. The system doesn’t make it easy, and I think sometimes it uses the wrong standards when deciding whether or not someone should adopt. When the system judges by race and income, it can make it hard for loving families to open their homes to new kids.
Adopting isn’t for everyone, of course, so it’s impossible to judge or condemn those who don’t do it. I think Tony’s point is that we shouldn’t just dismiss it as an impossibility just because it’s inconvenient. Consider my parent’s situation. They’re both in their fifties, they already have six kids, at one point they were giving constant care to two ailing grandparents, and they’re not rich. (A friend who heard they were adopting joked that by the time my new siblings came, I’d be changing both my parent’s and my sibling’s diapers. He’s probably right.) Anyway, the point is that it’s crazy for them to adopt — or it would be if they didn’t believe that God was calling them to do it.
I don’t think either Tony or Anthony is trying to turn adoption into some legalistic mandate. I think they’re just saying to consider it.
Report comment to moderator
#10, maybe that is their point. But the overt accusation is that the 65 million aren’t doing anything to help.
The system makes it more complicated than simply wanting to adopt.
Report comment to moderator
Since it’s pile on Tony day, as well as National Adoption Month…
“I don’t think a paragraph four mention in an article about something closely related, however, counts as coverage of National Adoption Month, do you?”
“Romney said he wanted to tour the Greenville agency, which handles more than 50 adoptions annually, because November is national adoption month.”
[emphasis mine]
Well, maybe.
Report comment to moderator
FP,
There was no such “overt accusation.” I said, in fact, that many of us are doing things to help. I asked a question: with that many professing evangelicals, can we find homes for orphans?
Report comment to moderator
Yeah, it takes some effort to adopt, but it’s not like getting a degree, in terms of time, money or jumping through hoops; and lots of people get degrees.
It’s a matter of motivation, and most people aren’t motivated to take on children with unknown issues. It’s a risk.
Report comment to moderator
TRR,
I’m going on the assumption that there is a difference between a mention in an unrelated article, and coverage of a topic. If it suits you and SteveG to conclude that I was inaccurate in my claim that you won’t learn about National Adoption Month by reading The Washington Post, please accept my deepest apologies for misleading you.
Report comment to moderator
“Does this mean that there are 65 million people missing huge sections of their Bibles?”
No, it means that the call to love we find in the Bible still outpaces our practice of it. It means we still have a fair moral distance to go before we attain biblical righteousness.
Nothing new there. But don’t dismiss the call just because this practice gap remains.
Report comment to moderator
Before having our fourth child, I investigated adoption pretty closely–after all, we wanted a girl this time and adoption was the only way to guarantee it.
We finally concluded I was not a good candidate to parent an adopted child. So we didn’t even start the process. Am I supposed to feel guilty from this post?
I have a number of friends who have adopted children–military people seem to do it a lot despite the moving and the complication of home visits in several states. Almost across the board they’ve gone overseas because of the same issues FP described.
Tony makes a good point, but it seems a bit unfair to blast all Christians for not helping with orphans when I suspect many are trying. Just not me. For good reason.
Report comment to moderator
No, Tony, I don’t think it counts as coverage, and it’s right for you to point out the lack of coverage, but I think it’s wrong for you to say it’s an unrelated article.
I mean “adoption” is in the headline and Romney said he was doing what he was doing because it’s national adoption month. How do you justify calling it unrelated? Why did you have to put that word in? What would the article have to say to be considered by you to be related, that would not simply be an article about National Adoption Month?
Report comment to moderator
As you all know, we have been trying to adopt for nearly thirty years, the past fifteen through the US system. We went through the classes multiple times, the security checks, criminal background checks, fingerprinting again and again, home studies, inspections, applications, etc. For hundreds of children and groups of children. We found the same roadblocks as FP. But finally it appears we have reached the time when God says, “These are the children I am entrusting to you for a season” and are absolutely delighted. They are definitely worth the wait. And we are in our fifties. And we still have six months to make it official. And in that time, hubbie has earned two degrees and three of our first batch have earned theirs.
The state and national blocks are huge. But the children are there. We have heard that there are enough children in care that one in five families should have them in their home. Getting them into those homes is the challenge.
Adoption is not for everyone but there are other ways to help. We are blessed with a tremendous, though tiny, church. The offers to take the kids for a time, do various activities with them, have us all over for dinner, offers of financial help, even just a hug or a phone call, go on and on and it is because of them we felt confident we could take in these particular children.
Report comment to moderator
Michelle,
Not in the least, we are all called to different things and your work in the crisis pregnancy arena is far beyond what I could do though I have stuck a toe in, in the past. The Body is made up of many parts, but those who are being called to look into it, should consider who is asking. If God is calling, He will provide the tools.
Report comment to moderator
TRR,
You are right, and I am wrong. I apologize for my error.
Michelle,
The post is about 65 million Christians, not just you. The point I tried to make, and apparently failed in trying, is that among these 65 million, it’s hard to believe that none of us have the means or time to care for orphans without homes. The point was not that, so long as a homeless orphan exists, all 65 million Christians are guilty. The point is that, as a large professing body, it seems that we — collectively — ought to have the wherewithal to care for every available orphan.
Report comment to moderator
Tony,
Thank you for posting this. Obviously it is a subject very close to my heart and it should be addressed. We do have the capacity in the Christian body to take these children in. But we live in a society that says somebody else will do it. Bringing it out in the open (again) will open a few more eyes to the opportunity and a few more will be taken into solid families. Thanks. Again, it does not mean all are expected to answer the call to visit the orphans in the same way.
Report comment to moderator
FP – 1
You make excellent points –
The system holds up many adoptions for just the reasons you state –
Those who pontificate loudly that others adopt a child, are the very ones who have not done so themselves, but might find time later in their lives to do so.
We have friends who have four (4) children of their own, yet adopted a child of another race into their home. They are a wonderful couple. They home school as well.
Report comment to moderator
Mumsee – 19
You are a blessing!
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
(blushing painfully) thank you, we serve a Risen Savior.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
Who are these people, pontificating loudly that others adopt a child? I used the words “we” and “our,” because I am talking about what appears to be a shortcoming in our body. Of course not everyone can adopt. The question is, can we, as a body of believers, do better?
Report comment to moderator
#26 Tony
Absolutely, we can do better. I tried to get my wife to adopt when she wanted to have another kid in her mid 40’s. She was too old to get pregnant again but did not want to adopt. I suppose I could divorce her now and find another wife who wants to adopt but that wasn’t part of the deal when we got married and I would feel bad about tossing her out over this when there are better reasons to do so.
I have to admit I was disappointed though.
Report comment to moderator
Tony,
It might be a shortcoming within the body, but many do adopt.
Yes you used the words “we” and “our” – It’s easy to make such sweeping statements when you aren’t doing it yourself.
Talk is easy, its the ‘doing’ that makes the difference.
Report comment to moderator
#3 Tony – Sorry!
I jumped the gun because I remember Mr. Bradley posting on this very subject before and I didn’t realize it was your article. I thought it was his original one, which unfortunately did appear to be placing a guilt trip on Christians. After looking more carefully, you actually have a very biblical and balanced perspective. Christians can do a lot more in this area. Adoption is a beautiful picture of the gospel. Please forgive me.
Report comment to moderator
Tony in #9: I don’t think a paragraph four mention in an article about something entirely different, however, counts as coverage of National Adoption Month, do you? Which is why I felt comfortable with the opening sentence to my post.
As TRR has pointed out and I believe you’ve acknowledged (#21) the article was not about “something entirely different,” but about something closely related.
The reason I bring it up is that it seems that some people seem to be unable to write about some topics without including such a gratuitous comment about the media.
I agree the Post has not given the topic big, splashy front-page coverage, but tell me this: If the Washington Post had written an article about it that followed the same outline as the one in the Christian Examiner … detailing the large number of Christians who do not seem to walk the talk about adoption … you’d be here blogging about how biased against Christians they are, wouldn’t you?
Report comment to moderator
Bianca,
No hard feelings, and thank you for your kind words. I can certainly use them today.
Victoria,
“We” and “our” aren’t intended as sweeping statements, they are intended to reflect our corporate unity, not that one could get much sense of that unity from our exchanges. We, the body, have a set of responsibilities, and we, the body, appear — just on the numbers, though some have pointed out the obstacles that exist — not to be zealously pursuing one of those responsibilities.
Now, you threw the word “pontificate” at me earlier, and it perplexed me so much that I looked it up:
“to speak in a pompous or dogmatic manner.”
That wasn’t completely helpful, of course, because then I had to look up dogmatic, to be sure I had the meaning right:
“asserting opinions in a doctrinaire or arrogant manner.”
So I’m curious: where have I been pompous, and where have I asserted opinions in a doctrinaire or arrogant manner?
I hope you’ll consider what I have to say next with as open a mind and heart as possible, and I’m sorry if it’s hurtful: You seem intent, here and in your comments on my other posts, to attributing the worst of intentions to me at every turn. It’s, well, downright unChristian of you. And I’ve seen how you treat other folks on this site, so I daresay it’s not just me having hurt feelings. How you speak to people, when you wear the label “Christian,” reflects how they see Christ.
I’ll pray for you, and for me, that we both do a better job of that, because I’ve certainly had a sharp tongue more than once here myself.
For the present discussion, let’s stipulate that I am a hypocrite, because my family has not adopted, yet here I am exhorting my fellow believers to do more to help orphans find homes. Despise me for it if you like. Do you admit that there is yet more to be done by Christians, given the numbers? That’s the only point I want to make. It seems like we can do more, and I’ll accept it if you think I’m a terrible person for saying so.
Report comment to moderator
SteveG,
Please don’t put me in the Rush Limbaugh box. Media bias is such a tired topic, and though it animated me when I was a Conservative, I could care less about it now. I really did think the Romney article was a passing mention of National Adoption Month, and therefore felt justified in my claim that the Post and Times gave it no coverage. When I did a Google News search, I found lots of articles in small papers, but nothing in the majors. That just struck me as interesting. Hence the first sentence in my post. I see TRR’s point, however. How about we just strike that first sentence? Deal?
Report comment to moderator
Tony,
A DRAMATIC over-reaction!
Report comment to moderator
Sigh.
Ok, Victoria.
Report comment to moderator
I really really shouldn’t stick my nose in here, but I’m going to anyway.
Victoria – You win the “Drama Queen” award.
And may I recommend, if you’ve never done so, to visit Mr. Woodlief’s blog. I think you might come away humbled. Well then again, maybe not.
Report comment to moderator
Tony
I used the word “pontificate” to FP in reference to his post 1, I didn’t throw anything to you at all,. . . . . the post wasn’t to you, nor should you become ‘upset’ because I used that word in a post to someone else.
The word “pontificate” means ………
Pontificate
Definition:
speak pompously: to speak about something in a knowing and self-important way, especially when not qualified to do so.
I did not post to you on this thread until you posted to me in Post 26, demanding to know “Who are these people, pontificating loudly that others adopt a child?”
Then of course there is your personal attack:……….
Before you go on, I would recommend you look back on these posts. I didn’t even post to you, YOU decided to post to me in Post 26 and you also decided my post to FP was to you which is incorrect -
Report comment to moderator
Controlling self with difficulty.
[Dr. Strangerlove grabs hand, keeps it from pressing any more keys.]
Report comment to moderator
Tony,
I apologize for distracting people from your important point: that adoption doesn’t get much press, and if it did, it might help more people to consider it and solve a couple of big problems.
If you want to know about adoption you definitely have to make some effort. It’s not going to just jump out at you from all directions, like many things in our culture do.
Thanks, and sorry again.
Report comment to moderator
Tony,
I’ll join TRR in apologizing for the distraction. I took your reference to the newspapers as an insinuation that they are biased against adoption (and presumably, for abortion.) I hope you understand, those accusations are not rare, and the way you worded your post sounded like more of the eye-rolling same.
I do agree that adoption is an important topic that should get more press.
Report comment to moderator
So what does this really mean? ……”65 million people missing huge sections of their Bibles?” …….
I wonder how many of these ‘writers’ who are very ‘emotional’ about this issue of ‘foster care’ – ‘orphans’ ….. how many of them have adopted children? Where is the real caring and dedication from those who admonish the Evangelical Church?
I believe its true that many Believers do not take the admonition seriously to take care of the fatherless, the widows, and those without. However, I do find it stunning, that those who admonish others are not stepping forward to say that THEY are taking care of children, other than their own.
There are those on this blog who have adopted, and they never talk much about themselves, they don’t speak in terms of how much they are doing. They do share their burdens with us, and I’m glad and happy to pray for them. I love the fact that they seem to enjoy the children they have been given, and want only the best for each of them.
Report comment to moderator
That quote of Bradley’s is extremely annoying.
Report comment to moderator
Sorry I’m late to the conversation but, I have a friend who is a foster parent. He and his wife have taken in children of all races up to the age of eight. All have been adopted within a year. My question is how long has this 115,000 been up for adoption? Are these the same 115,000 kids or are these kids getting adopted but new ones just keep coming?
Report comment to moderator
KBELLS,
In the books, there are very few children under eight available except in sibling groups as many people believe they have fewer problems and will be easier to develop into solid citizens (probably rightly so in many cases) so they are adopted fairly quickly when they become available. The kids in long term foster care (ten/fifteen years) are generally the older ones. Most of these children remain in the system for their entire under eighteen years, until they age out. Often they are shifted from home to home as their behaviors can be very challenging. For example, our oldest may have been in as many as ten homes, nobody seems to know for sure. Initially his social worker told us he was in only his second placement. His foster families would have loved to keep him but his tendency to run away was too much. For another home, it was the stealing and breaking. For another it was the criminal behavior. Feel free to pray for us.
If a three year old is part of a sibling group of say, three, and the other two are eight and twelve, the chances diminish and the older the siblings the less likely they will find a home. Twelve seems to be a big stopping point as well as people believe the child is too set in his ways. Girls seem to go more quickly but I don’t know why that is.
Report comment to moderator
Thank you, Mumsee. That answers a lot of my questions. And you are not only in MY prayers, I tell other people about you.
Report comment to moderator
Mumsee
I’m glad you have given the information, and how TRUE it is.
So many times people have no idea how this works or the fact that two, three or maybe four children from one family all needing to stay together.
If I remember correctly you said in one post, just the other day, perhaps another sibbling would be joining your family. Am I right?
I think of you often.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
We had to tell the social worker, that though we are very interested in taking in the older brother, it could not be until we get these firmly settled or we would be at much greater risk of losing all of them. Old habits must be set aside and that takes time, as new habits are developed. Meantime, older brother has settled down for a time and his grandmother is comfortable with continuing to keep him. So he is still with family, just not the younger ones.
Thanks for your prayers and those of the many others. We attribute any success we are having to a group effort with a lot of people holding us up in prayer, the local body giving hands on assistance and encouragement, and the Lord God molding His beloved children into the tools He wants them to be.
Report comment to moderator
Mumsee
You certainly have a gift of mercy, LOVE, and kindness for these kids. Not everyone is called to do what you and your husband are providing these children, but you have heeded the call.
How many kids do you have now?
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
We just have the four at home, the first batch is grown and gone. In the past we have had many foster children both officially and unofficially but it has always been our desire to provide a permanent home for those who do not have one. We want to offer a place where they can be comfortable coming home on vacation and a family from whom they might receive a care package at college.
Speaking of which, we have learned through our classes that there are full ride scholarships available to any child in the PACNW who has been in foster care but these scholarships have never come close to being used up as so seldom do kids that have had these issues ever make the leap to college. College is not for everybody (I did not go a full year before dropping out when I realized studying was required), but I do think it might be encouraged so that one whole segment of our society does not view minimum wage jobs as the peak of excellence for forty year olds.
Report comment to moderator
Mumsee
I hope some of the kids can take advantage of those scholarships, that would be great.
Do any of the kids enjoy Church activities?
I told my husband about you and your husband and what you are doing. My husband did businss with a couple a few years ago who had taken in many children throughout their lives. What a blessing.
Report comment to moderator
TRR and SteveG,
Absolutely no reason to apologize. You had valid points, and if people want to get distracted, they’ll get distracted regardless. I was too snippy in my replies to both of you, however, and so I hope you’ll forgive me.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
One of our difficulties is that the kids come from a foster home of an SDA family, at least the mom. They were there a couple of years so we want to be very careful of things contrary to what they have been taught and yet we want to expose them to the Truth. This is an area we definitely could use prayer as the Lord provides with learning moments, we want to be available. We also want to develop our own time of study as a family but have to tread very lightly, especially with the older daughter as she was quite attached and we can say nothing that might cast a shadow there. She was also in Pathfinders which we have allowed her to join here for continuity and I am unsure how much their belief system colors the club teaching. If we see any blatant problems we will have to pull her out. Our church is too small and these are about the only children so the church activity for the kids besides service is going to lunch or dinner or to the homes of senior citizens.
Report comment to moderator
Mumsee,
I will be praying.
Is there any way you can get the kids in another young peoples group…..even though it might not be the ideal church?
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
Actually, the kids are enjoying the slower pace of not being so involved. There last home was very scheduled. Here they are enjoying a bit more time as kids. We will be keeping our eyes open. We heard for example, that the church in a nearby town provides an after school Bible club once a week. We will be checking into that. But keep in mind, we are also some distance away from towns. The Pathfinders will keep two of them very busy. Oldest has no interest in things church but how much of that is self protection and how much is actual belief is yet to be determined. Youngest is happy with everything.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!