How many churches would feed a starving baby?


In the Bible, Jesus commands his followers to feed the hungry, shelter refugees, and comfort the afflicted. Whether they obey or disobey this command, he says, on judgment day they’ll be treated as if they had done the same to Jesus himself:

“Then the King will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’

Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink? And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee? And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?’

And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.’

Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’

Then they also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?’

Then he will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.'”

—Matthew 25:31-46

Although the Bible contains many atrocities and evils, it also has some good, even beautiful passages. This verse, in this atheist’s opinion, is at the top of the list.

It’s praiseworthy because it teaches the bedrock value of empathy. It says that the measure of a Christian’s character isn’t how often they go to church, how many gospel tracts they hand out, or how many Ten Commandments plaques they cram into classrooms and courthouses – but how they treat the poor, oppressed and downtrodden. It tells them to focus on those society looks down on.

This is a beautiful message, and if more churches followed it, the world would be a better place. That being said, it’s fair to ask: do Christians follow it? Or is it just one of the many parts of the Bible they ignore?

One person conducted a brilliant experiment to find out.

On TikTok, Nikalie Monroe had a simple yet ingenious test. She called churches and religious institutions across the country – some small and humble, some large and wealthy – and posed as a mother in need of help.

She said she was out of food and money and her two-month-old baby had had nothing to eat since last night. (For verisimilitude, she played the sound of a crying infant in the background.) She asked the church if they’d donate a can of baby formula. If the person who answered the phone suggested a local food bank, she said that she’d already called that place and they couldn’t help.

The test was whether the church would help, as Jesus told them to, or whether they’d make up excuses or deflect the responsibility onto someone else.

Can you guess what happened?

According to Nikalie’s report, she called 42 churches and other religious institutions. Of those, 33 – a huge majority – either gave her the runaround or said no.

In this category, there were many huge, wealthy churches that unquestionably could have helped: for example, Dream City Church, a Pentecostal megachurch in Phoenix which Charlie Kirk attended.

Joel Osteen’s massive Lakewood Church in Houston told Nikalie she could put in an application to their “benevolence ministry”, but said it might take weeks for them to approve her request – as if that’s helpful for a baby who’s starving now. (This is the same church that refused to house flood refugees during Hurricane Harvey.)

At the 13,000-member First Baptist Church of Dallas, the person who answered the phone said, “I’m not aware of any programs that we have to help you.” Nikalie asked if the church was pro-life, and they hung up on her.

Germantown Baptist Church in Memphis said, “Our benevolence is for our members” and turned her away. Note, it wouldn’t even be good enough for her to be Christian – she’d have to be a member of that specific church for them to consider helping!

(As a side note: I listened to a lot of Nikalie’s videos to write this post. The sound of a screaming baby is viscerally disturbing. It was taking a psychological toll on me, and I knew there was no actual baby! Imagine the hard-heartedness of people who listened to it in the belief that it was real and still did nothing.)

This is just what an atheist would have predicted. We’ve always said that the churches’ pretensions of morality are empty shams. They claim to be the source of all goodness, but in reality, most are self-perpetuating clubhouses of privilege. The only thing they care about is accumulating as much wealth and power as they can get their greedy hands on.

To be sure, not every church flunked Nikalie’s experiment. Although most turned her away, a few said yes. Most of these were either smaller, poorer churches, or non-Christian religious minorities.

For example, when she called a tiny church in rural Kentucky, the pastor, who’s a great-grandfather, immediately offered to go out and buy it himself. (After her experiment was publicized, this video went viral and over $100,000 in donations poured in to that church.)

A mosque in North Carolina said yes the instant she asked.

A Buddhist temple suggested several ideas for her to try, and when she said none of those had panned out, the woman who answered the phone offered her money.

What’s striking is that some churches that failed the test – and were called out on social media for it – didn’t react with shame or contrition. Instead, they attacked Nikalie personally. It’s as though they thought, if they could find some reason to condemn her, it would invalidate her experiment.

For example, the pastor of Germantown Baptist gave a sermon where he huffed that his church was targeted by “radical woke unbelieving trolls” who engaged in “an unrighteous fake attempt to set a trap for us“.

He didn’t show the slightest remorse. He didn’t concede that, even if this was a trap, the way the church responded says something about them. He couldn’t even be bothered to say that they’d learned a lesson or that they’d reevaluate their members-only policy.

It gets worse. Raymond Johnson, pastor of Baton Rouge’s Living Faith Christian Church, arrogantly sneered, “I don’t apologize to the devil.” He said Nikalie had “the spirit of a witch” and, most shockingly, “my Bible say[s]… do not allow that thing to live”. (Is this a death threat wrapped in scripture?)

And Steven L. Anderson, the grotesquely misogynist pastor of Faithful Word Baptist Church in Arizona, snarled and raged about “‘single mother’ whores” (Nikalie never claimed to be a single mother in her experiment). He said – where other people could see it, under his own name – “Churches should not be funding fornicators and their bastards.” (Remember, brethren, Jesus threw the first stone at a prostitute!)

What deepens the sting is that most of these churches are conservative institutions who believe that government safety nets should be dismantled because it’s the church, not the state, that’s supposed to be helping the needy. But when presented with a perfect opportunity to do just that, they failed miserably. They put the lie to their own faith and their own politics.

These churches are naked in their hypocrisy. But rather than treating this as an opportunity for self-reflection, they lashed out in anger at the person who exposed them.

Again, while this was the more common response, there were good people in every religion who were willing to help a fellow human in need. The beauty of Nikalie’s test is that it’s a clear, unambiguous way to tell which is which. It’s like a litmus strip that changes color the moment you walk through the door. More than anything else, that’s what most churches fear: an inescapable test of their actions, not just their words.

Comments

  1. Katydid says

    All three of the Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) have a requirement to feed the hungry. The mosque immediately offered formula–I forgot where I read it, but I read that they even asked the brand so someone could go get it for her. The tiny churches and the black churches offered her what she needed. Even the non-Abrahamic groups she called offered aid.

    Is anybody surprised the megachurches refused? If so, they’re hopelessly stupid. Also, the megachurch pastors are responding in textbook abuser ways by blaming the victim and hand-waving away their professed pro-life cred.

    While thinking about this, it just highlights how Netanyahu’s policy of starving Gaza is even more atrocious than just being a war crime: he’s going against what his faith requires him to do.

  2. anat says

    Re: Netanyahu – not clear if he has any faith. His father was anti-religious. He occasionally cos-plays with religion for political advantage. It’s enough to condemn him on a moral basis.

  3. Katydid says

    I’ve read that Netanyahu has been very accommodating to the ultra-religious sects, so I assumed he was some level of religious. The hypocrisy of claiming to be from an area that requires feeding the starving, yet gleefully starves people to death in defiance of worldwide condemnation…

    • anat says

      Most major Israeli politicians and parties accommodate the ultra-orthodox, it is pure coalition math. There are very few individuals and parties that are explicitly against them. In the current landscape those are on the right Yisrael Beitenu (Israel is our home), which originally appealed to recent immigrants from the former Soviet Union (who have a lot of trouble with religious institutions, mostly due to a history of intermarriage and decades of living in the forcibly secularized Soviet culture), on the left it used to be the Meretz party (itself a union of a civil rights party and a socialist party), now the Meretz faction of the new party they formed when they united with the Labor party – the now go by the name ‘The Democrats’ (hmm, just looked at their website, looks like they are all taking an anti-clerical orientation, I wish them the best of luck!), and of the parties tat mostly appeal to Palestinian Israelis there are the communists (HADASH – The Democratic Front for Peace and Equality).

  4. Dunc says

    I’ve read that Netanyahu has been very accommodating to the ultra-religious sects

    As has Trump. I think they both just see religion as a tool to be used to manipulate people.

  5. Katydid says

    Republicans have been sucking up to the religious whackadoos since Reagan’s team figured out they were stupid enough to vote against their best interests for Republicans. Israel whose reason for existing is to be an “ancestral homeland” for a particular religion so the pandering-to-the-most-extreme is kinda baked-in to the premise. And the most-extreme (you would think) would actually follow what their deity requires of them and be upset when their leaders don’t do what their deity wants.

  6. says

    Christianity really is something people do instead of being nice people, isn’t it?

    Not that we should ever have expected anything different from a religion whose founders literally stole a God from another religion and wrote fanfic “scripture” in which He impregnated an under-age mortal girl without her knowledge, never mind consent; then turned His back on His former favourites. And they worship Him not in spite of this, which would be bad enough, but because of it. To a Christian, sexual abuse of children is not only not wrong; it’s straight-up God-like behaviour!

    Pressuring a vulnerable woman into keeping a baby she does not want, then punishing her for doing what they suggested is absolutely on-brand for these people.

  7. says

    Fred Clark at Slacktivist once sat down and compared the revenue for Alabama churches to the amount the federal government spends on the safety net there. No way could they keep up.
    I suspect some people who think churches could pick up the charity slack underestimate bigly how bad poverty gets. And some are probably hot at the thought of having people come to them hat in hand, then separating the sheep from the goats.
    None of which excuses the churches in this sample.

  8. Katydid says

    Of course the government can provide better than individuals, but we aren’t talking about impoverished Alabama. We’re talking about North Carolina, where many of the banks and credit card companies settled 20 years ago for the tax benefits. The home of the Research Triangle, where high-tech companies and universities provide high-paying jobs. A place where pastors of megachurches own their own private planes and high-end cars. A pastor who actually valued “teh BAYBEEEZE” as they claim would be able to pull the cash out of his own pocket for a can of formula.

    In fact, it was the smaller, minority churches and other faiths entirely who stepped up and offered aid. These groups have less money and fewer resources, but didn’t hesitate to meet the needs of a stranger who asked.

    Some anecdata: the local news runs frequent stories about the nearby city, where various groups offer back-to-school supplies, holiday meals, coat drives, and other giveaways to those in need. Often these are sponsored by small, inner-city churches whose members look like they don’t have two nickels to rub together. Where are the megachurches?

    Some more anecdata: I belong to a social group that recently participated in a food giveaway in the parking lot of the local library/shopping center. In the days afterwards, I was approached by several members of the nearby megachurch, demanding my help to work their monthly food giveaway (provided by the state food bank). Why? Because nobody at the megachurch wanted to do it. I pointed out that their church literally has a thousand members (they brag about it) and if they want the credit, they need to staff it themselves. With 1000 members, each member might only have to volunteer once every five years. What response did I get? A lot of griping about how “the wrong people” were getting aid and they were tired of it.

Leave a Reply to Katydid Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *