The anniversary of the Columbine shootings today has turned my thoughts toward security and ministry. Schools, on the one hand, have initiated massive security protocol changes in the decade since the tragic violence at a suburban high school. Campus Safety Magazine reports suggest that 90 percent of schools say they are safer now than they were 10 years ago when the tragic and senseless deaths of students shocked the nation.

Likewise some churches have followed suit, initiating new security measures, especially in recent years in the wake of violence at church and ministry sites in Colorado, and even as recently as last month in Illinois.

Questions remain as to whether all this security actually protects a school or a church from the violent emotional venting of outcasts that turn their inner pain into outer brutality. Further questions about how to deal with the pain in the first place are perhaps more pertinent to churches. Some good ideas are included in a recent article on ministry to the hurting on Church Central.

The dilemma that faces many congregations, however, is the juxtaposition of both ministry and security concerns. I’ve reported on Church Central before about the dilemma over the homeless in the Seattle, Washington, area. It is so interesting not only because of these ministry and security questions coming to a head there, but because in one of the least-churched areas of the United States congregations are taking a bashing (presumably from people who don’t attend or support them) for not taking in more homeless people.

Saying no to homeless

According to the Seattle Post Intelligencer, three churches have said no this week to sheltering the homeless. A newcomer to the homeless project cited unmet demands for background checks. Another church is trading its homeless focus to focus on low-income families. The third is dealing with a dwindling congregation and funding for any ministry.

Most of the responses to this story are focused on the background check issue. And this is the point of today's blog: ministry and safety don’t always neatly co-exist. I don’t think churches should be upbraided for wanting to keep women and children safe from would-be or have-been molesters and rapists. But forcing homeless people to take a background check before they can sleep in your church is like making birds pass medical screenings before allowing them to nest in your trees. I think it's a much safer--and more theologically sound--policy to assume all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God than to think some people are okay while others need to be checked.

Other smarter measures for safely keeping homeless at churches were also listed in the article and subsequent responses. Keeping different hours for the homeless shelter and the other congregational functions in the building was one measure. Insuring that at least two screened adults are present when caring for church children was another.

Churches are called to be compassionate, but not at the expense of being wise. Part of that wisdom includes understanding that people are flawed--whether they live in houses or not. Putting solid security measures in place can mitigate a lot of trouble and can keep feelings from being hurt. If every volunteer must be screened, then it isn't just a homeless guy, but the pastor's wife, the white collar executive and the college student. Everyone is screened if they want to volunteer with kids or money, or work in other vulnerable areas. Not only that, but church workers should work in same-gender pairs to further their accountability. Most of the time it isn't homeless criminals that cause trouble in churches. Still, out of the 50 churches the Seattle homeless organization has written, asking for help, thus far no one has responded.