Orphans and the Church

Thoughts on James 1:27, Part 1

2012-02-01T11:28:00.000-08:00

The following is taken from my talk at the Refresh Conference at Overlake Christian Church in Redmond, WA on January 27, 2012:

James 1:27 -- “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.”

We often key on the first half of that as justification for adoption, foster care and orphan care. Some people in the adoption/foster care/orphan ministry world have said that this is a mandate from God to care for orphans. I don’t really see it that way. And frankly, we don’t need a mandate here. I think His word is pretty clear on this issue elsewhere. If we don’t know we’re supposed to care for orphans by the time we get to James, we’re very selective readers.

While some read it as a mandate, I really see it as an example, or an illustration, of what pure religion looks like. James is saying if you want to know what pure religion looks like, it looks like this. Short of a mandate, in my opinion, but certainly pointing people in that direction.

Now as an adoption and foster care advocate, I have used this verse to “gently nudge” Christians who “haven’t seen the light” as it were. I’m sure you can relate. But I'm not really here to talk about the first half of James 1:27, because most anyone who would read this blog is pretty much on board and gets it already, whether you see it like I do, as an illustration, or as a mandate. We know that orphans are on God’s heart and that He wants His people to love and care for them. There's not much room for debate there.

So let’s turn our attention to the second half of James 1:27. How many of you generally skip over or gloss over the second half when you relate this verse to the cause of adoption or orphan care or foster care? I know I do sometimes, but I’d like to encourage you not to do that.

If you notice, there is an “and” in there, not an “or”. That means pure and faultless religion is both. It’s not a pick and choose proposition. Care for the marginalized and stay unpolluted while doing so. Seems simple enough. But is it? How does the second half relate to adoption and foster care?

I see the second half of James 1:27 relating to this cause in three ways. I'll discuss the first in this post.

When I read this verse, I’m struck with the realization that some Christians very often skip over the first part of James 1:27 and go straight to part two…keeping oneself from being polluted from the world. Their lives become about sin management. Sin avoidance. I think that as a result Christians oftentimes retreat from the world in order to avoid becoming polluted, priding themselves on how they’re able to escape the evils of the world. I’ve seen it in writings, in teachings, heard it in conversations. We retreat from the world, all in the name of avoiding sin, or remaining unpolluted.

The problem is that complete isolation from the world isn’t the life we’re called to. Yes, we are to flee from sin. But that doesn’t mean we huddle in a safe Christian bubble and wait for Jesus to come back. There is a hurting world out there. There are widows. There are orphans. And orphans, especially, cannot be cared for if we don’t go out into the world. In other words, if we take part two of James’ words to the extreme, or I would argue incorrectly, as I see many Christians do, and we isolate ourselves in order to simply avoid temptation, we cannot show the world what pure and faultless religion looks like. We have to be engaged with those who are hurting and in need. And we have to do so while still remaining unpolluted by the world. The verse does not say we are to hide from the pollution of the world. It says we are to avoid becoming polluted. There is a difference. So if we misread the second half of James 1:27 or put too much weight on it to the detriment of the first half, we will not be very likely to be able to engage in the first half with any effectiveness. Christians who isolate themselves from the world in an effort to remain unpolluted by the world will not care for orphans. They just won’t.

But I don't think James is mainly talking about that kind of pollution anyway. I think he's talking more about our worldview becoming polluted. More on that next time.

Not My Will, but Yours

2011-11-17T07:28:00.000-08:00

My friends are hurting. Not just one couple is grieving, but two, and the daughter of one couple as well. Why are they grieving? Each of these families has been fostering children and the children they have been caring for have been moved out of their homes…in one case to a relative’s home, and in the other case, back to the birth mother. It can be argued that these two moves are not in the best interests of these children, but that isn’t the point. The point is they have been moved, my friends are feeling the loss and the loss clearly hurts.

Even though these children had not been with my friends for long, the pain is there. Our friends had grown to love these children. In the past, social workers would warn foster families against becoming too attached to children placed in their homes…against loving them…for this very reason, but I always scoffed at that suggestion.

As a Christian foster parent, we have to see things differently from the way others see them. In becoming foster parents, we are serving the state, but more importantly, we are serving God. We are being obedient to His call to love the least of these. We are demonstrating what it means to be followers of Christ by visiting orphans in their distress. We are making ourselves available for how God wants to use us.

From Psalm 68 we know that God places the lonely (yes, including children in foster care systems) in homes. From experience, we know He places them in homes for forever sometimes, and for a short period of time other times. For us, as Christians, withholding love isn’t an option. Regardless of whether we keep those children permanently through adoption, and regardless of what some social workers might advise, we need to love those children as they deserve to be loved from the day they set foot in our homes. If, through loving them we become attached to them, and they to us, then so be it. Children are designed to need love, and they do better when they receive that love.

It’s hard to give up someone you love, but my friends will be okay. They will likely continue to grieve, and they will cry, as they surely have been. Ultimately, though, they will trust that God sees the bigger picture and that He is in control. They can trust Him for the best for those kids, and they can trust that He used them to bless the kids for as long as they were in their homes. I know them well enough to know they will continue to pray for the kids well into the future.

Others will look on and silently think to themselves that this is the very reason they don’t open their homes to children in foster care. I pray that they will voice these thoughts to my friends, because in doing so, they will hear that in spite of the pain they are now feeling, it is worth it to answer God’s call and to make themselves available to how God wants to use them…for however long He chooses.

Indian Child Welfare Act, Part 3

2011-09-16T09:49:00.001-07:00

Chances are you have never heard of Jose Rodriguez or his brother Emilio. Jose and Emilio were voluntarily placed, along with their younger sister, by their parents with their paternal grandparents in Palmdale, California. Jose and Emilio had lived most of their young lives with their grandparents when social workers decided they had a better plan -- a plan that would change the children's lives forever. Jose was 4 and Emilio 3 at the time.

The children are 3/8 Ute Indian on their mother's side. The Ute tribe requires a 5/8 blood quantum for membership, which meant the children are not eligible for membership in the tribe, and therefore, the Indian Child Welfare Act did not apply to them. That apparently didn't stop social workers in L.A. County from involving the tribe, and eventually the tribe agreed to take the children. No reports of any abuse or neglect by the paternal grandparents show up in any of the articles about the case. It was simply a matter of culture. The social workers believed the children should be with their Indian family and apparently valued that connection over the children's connection with their Hispanic family.

On August 7th, 2004, a tribal van picked up the three children against their wishes and carted them off to Eastern Utah. Evidently several relatives declined to take the children, and they were eventually placed with their maternal grandmother, a woman who reportedly had an IQ of 65, had 30-40 past arrests, mostly alcohol-related, and who had 2 convictions for child endangerment. Still, in spite of the obvious red flags, she was determined to be an acceptable caretaker for the kids.

About a week after the children were placed with their maternal grandmother, she began to beat the boys. Severely. Three weeks after they were placed with her, Jose was in a Utah hospital, not expected to recover from the coma she had beaten him into. Emilio had burns and bruises on his body. Reports stated that she had beaten the boys for speaking Spanish.

Eventually, against the predictions of his doctors, Jose did survive, though he will never be the same. According to one doctor, "He is going to have significant impairment for the rest of his life." An article published three and a half years after his abuse reported that even after all that time, he still had paralysis on his right side, walked with a pronounced limp, and struggled to learn as a result of the brain damage inflicted by his grandmother. Further, he and his siblings still feared social workers and police officers, afraid that they would again be taken from their loving grandparents.

The grandmother got a 19 year sentence for abusing her grandchildren. Her boyfriend received a 1-15 year sentence for failing to protect the children. The federal government eventually paid the family a million dollars and their paternal grandmother has now legally adopted them.

Still, a huge question remains for me. What about the social workers? Were there any repercussions or were they able to continue with their jobs as if nothing had ever happened? They should be held criminally liable for what happened to those children. They applied the Indian Child Welfare Act when it didn't apply and then placed three innocent children in harm's way by putting them in a home with someone who never should have been trusted to care for children. Where is the accountability?

An article published in the Salt Lake Tribune the month before the grandmother's trial states that while the grandmother was about to go to trial, "no one in California or at the Ute tribe appears to be investigating or will even discuss the disastrous placement and the gaps it exposed in their child protection systems." That's hardly surprising. L.A. County DCFS tends to play "Circle the Wagons" whenever one or more of its workers screws up. We've seen it time and time again.

One thing that makes this particular case so frustrating for me is that Terri and I had gone to DCFS headquarters repeatedly about the Indian Unit. We had told them of our experiences and the experiences of others. We had told them that we had witnessed social workers lying in court, and making decisions that were clearly not in the best interests of the children in their care. In May of 2004, we met with one of the Deputy Directors who was over the Indian Unit. He let us talk, appeared to listen to us and then brushed us off with the cursory, "We'll look into it."

In September 2004, I sat in the office of the then Director of DCFS and was told by this same Deputy that he had personally looked into every placement of every child in the Indian Unit since we had come to him with our concerns four months earlier and that he was satisfied they were all in "appropriate" placements at the time. Days later, I discovered Jose Rodriguez was in a coma in a Utah hospital at the time he uttered those words to me. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think a hospital bed recovering from avoidable abuse can ever be mistaken for an "appropriate" placement for any child.

Indian Child Welfare Act, Part 2

2011-09-06T16:10:00.000-07:00

When we first took in Chris and Ant in July 2000, social workers told us they were amazed at how quickly the kids attached to us. In fact, one veteran county social worker noted that she had never seen foster kids bond so quickly to their foster parents as the boys had to us. They were calling us Mom and Dad almost from the start. It was, it seemed, a match made in heaven.

About a month and a half into the placement, we were approached by a different county social worker who was doing an adoption assessment and asked us if we would be willing to adopt the boys if reunification efforts failed. We were thrilled. We had fallen in love with them from the start (pretty easy to do if you know our sons) and were very much interested in giving them a permanent home with our family should the need for adoption arise.

One day about four months into their placement with us, I was holding Chris in my arms in a store. He looked around and asked me if I thought the people in the store would think I was his "real dad." I said yeah, maybe they would think that. He looked at me and said, "I wish you were my real dad, Dad."

Everyone involved in the case believed the boys were in the best home for them and were thrilled to see them attached and thriving so quickly.

Then, in the next few weeks, everything changed. Without going into too many details, it was discovered that the boys were part Native-American. In fact, they were 1/16 Native. Their maternal great-great grandfather had been a full-blooded member of the Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska. The boys didn't know it. They had never lived on or near the reservation. They had never even been within a thousand miles of the reservation. They had never been involved in tribal culture or customs. Their only connection to the tribe was a few drops of blood. In fact, the picture above illustrates the amount of Indian blood our sons have coursing through their veins.

Still, the case was taken from the social worker who had marveled at their early attachment, and it was turned over to the Native American Unit, a Unit staffed by social workers who, unlike other DCFS social workers, were not required to hold a Masters in Social Work.

According to the system, which was charged with carrying out the provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act, we were no longer the right parents for them. According to the system, we, as white parents, were absolutely unfit to raise these two "Indian" boys, a label that was slapped onto them by ICWA, a label they had never used to describe themselves before, and haven't since. Never mind that we had raised them very well for several months and by all accounts, they were thriving. Never mind that the boys told everyone involved that they wanted to stay with us. Never mind that their therapist had grave concerns for their well-being were they to be taken from us. Never mind that if they had been discovered to be 1/16 Black, Asian, or whatever, it wouldn't have been an issue. Never mind that Ant is 8 times more Hispanic than Native, and our ability to raise a half-Hispanic child was never questioned. They were labeled Indian. We were labeled white and were therefore deemed unfit and told there was no way we would be allowed to adopt them. We had gone from the best parents available to these two boys to the worst.

Social workers couldn't wait to get the children out of our home, going so far as to lie on the witness stand under oath in order to justify their recommendations to have the kids removed from us. They ignored the negative effects the threatened removal had on the children. When told of our son Chris' repeated nightmares (all related to being moved from our home), we were continually told the same things...soothe him...kids are resilient...they'll be okay. If kids in foster care are so resilient, why are our prisons and homeless shelters filled with veterans of the system? It was bull, and the social workers knew it, but they didn't care. They had an agenda. Plain and simple.

What followed was a very expensive custody dispute accompanied by a series of miracles that allowed us to keep the boys against tremendous odds. Ultimately, what swayed the judge was the boys' birthmother (1/8 Native herself), who testified in court that she had heard good things about us and wanted them to stay with us. That allowed the judge to apply ICWA's "good cause" exceptions to the placement preferences and leave them in our home. After winning the appeal that was filed in the wake of that ruling, we were finally able to adopt them, nearly three years after they were initially placed with us.

The case raised so many questions for me, not the least of which is this: how did the boys' best interests get completely redefined for no other reason but the presence of a few ounces of Indian blood? They were the same kids both before and after the discovery of their Native ancestry. Their love for us hadn't changed. Their interests hadn't changed. Their need for permanence and stability and continuity in their lives hadn't changed. Their desire to be adopted by us hadn't changed. Yet, according to the system, hiding beneath the heavy shadow of ICWA, everything about them had changed.

ICWA is a law that was born from noble intentions. Sadly, it is also a law that is now being misused and misapplied. As a result, a lot of kids, in foster care and otherwise, many already severely traumatized in their young lives, are being further traumatized by being labeled Indian and by having their stable placements with loving parents threatened as a result of that label.

Indian Child Welfare Act, Part 1

2011-08-29T09:01:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow morning we will make the familiar drive up the 710 Freeway to Edelman Children's Court to finalize our daughter Emme's adoption. Emme was placed with us in November 2009 when she was just under six weeks of age. Given her birthmother's complete lack of compliance with her reunification case plan, and her birthfather's support of us in adopting her, she should have been adopted a long time ago. Still, we're thankful that the day has finally come.

Some friends of ours from church are still waiting for the day to come when they can finalize their young daughter's adoption. She has been with them for about a year and a half, and they signed adoption placement paperwork in March, which means she should have been adopted in June. Still, she and her parents wait. Why? Because no one in the system can produce evidence that social workers asked whether or not she is Native-American when she was first brought into the system. Yes, that's right. Complicating matters is the fact that her birthmother is now deceased, so finding an answer to that question is considerably more difficult than before.

Why should it matter? After all, Emme is half African-American and joins siblings with Asian, Hispanic, Caucasian, and yes, Native-American roots themselves. In this day and age, with all the multi-racial families (both biological and adoptive) around, should it really matter if this little girl has any Native-American blood running through her veins? She needs a permanent family and our friends have been her mom and dad ever since she can remember. Anyone can see that the system should move on from this and finalize her adoption as quickly as possible.

The truth is that if evidence is submitted that she is indeed part Native-American, then the provisions of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) may be triggered, and her entire adoption could be in jeopardy. If she is part of a federally-recognized tribe, that tribe may decide to petition that her case be moved to tribal court. Ultimately it could be ruled that she be removed from our friends' home and placed with complete strangers...all because she is part Native-American.

The Multiethnic Placement Act of 1994 says, in part, that "a state...may not delay or deny the placement of a child for adoption or into foster care on the basis of the race, color, or national origin of the adoptive or foster parent, or the child involved." Great law. Makes sense. Very few level-headed people could argue that this law is not in the best interest of children in need of permanent homes. ICWA trumps it.

Because ICWA trumps it, and because Congress will not revamp this well-meaning but misguided law, a perfectly precious and innocent little girl waits in legal limbo while social workers, attorneys, the foster agency, and a judge try to figure out what to do next. A girl, I might add, that very likely doesn't have an ounce of Native-American blood in her body. Oh, and all at taxpayer expense, of course.

This is the first of many times I will write about ICWA. It is a law that nearly prevented our adoption of our sons a decade ago, so I have a few opinions on it, and it is a law that, while intended in part to protect children, has done little to protect children, often bringing harm to those it was designed to protect.

Please pray that this little girl gets the permanent home she needs and deserves soon.

Help!

2011-08-22T15:15:00.000-07:00

A lot of us dive into adoption with this idea that once we adopt, everything will be okay...for our new child...and for our family. The reality is that a lot of children adopted from foster care or institutions overseas have experienced a great deal of trauma in their young lives. That trauma doesn't just disappear with the slamming of a court gavel or the signing of adoption orders.

Oftentimes, the trauma manifests itself in unexpected and difficult behaviors that adoptive parents simply aren't prepared to handle. Unfortunately, these behaviors can lead to further trauma, not just in the children's lives, but in the lives of their families as well. Many adoptive families struggle as a result, and some even give up on their children, sending them back to institutions, or placing them for adoption with new families.

Where can these struggling adoptive families turn for support? Right now...there just aren't a lot of options. So maybe the question is, where should they be able to turn for support? The answer to that question is the same as for any family struggling with life's difficulties...they should be able to turn to their church for the support they need to get back on their feet. Unfortunately, as ill-prepared as these families are to handle their children's behavioral issues and special needs, many churches, including those with thriving adoption/foster care ministries are even less prepared to support them.

That's where the Hope for Orphans Institute comes in. The Institute will be held on September 16th and 17th at the Hope Center in Plano, Texas. Its objective is to "equip and help orphan ministry leaders, families, pastors, counselors, social workers and advocates to better serve the increasing number of families adopting special needs, at-risk and older children." For more information on the Hope for Orphans Institute, go here. If you decide to go, e-mail me at johmo@earthlink.net and I will give you a promo code that will enable you to register at half price.

A Teaching Moment

2011-07-05T12:15:00.000-07:00

We were riding through eastern North Carolina last Sunday on our way to my parents' house in Williamsburg, VA after a week on the Outer Banks. I had my two sons and one of my daughters in the car with me. As we rambled along a quiet country road, I commented that our ancestors had lived in this area a couple of hundred years before.

My son Anthony spoke up, asking me if my ancestors were his (and my other kids') ancestors, too. Of course, I told him.

After a short silence, I asked Ant if Jesus is the Messiah. He rightly said yes. I pointed out that the Bible said the promised Messiah would come from the line of David. I asked him how Jesus was related to David. Again, he rightly answered that Jesus was descended from David through Joseph. I asked him if Joseph was Jesus' biological father. Another right response...no. He was starting to get it now.

It was through Joseph's adoption of Jesus that Jesus was descended from David and thus, qualified to be the promised Messiah. So...if Jesus is the Messiah (and I don't think the jury is still out on that one), then my ancestors are my kids' ancestors, too.

It's always cool when God gives us opportunities to make our kids feel more secure in their new identities. We look for them every chance we get.

"Bella"

2007-11-07T21:31:00.001-08:00

By now many of you who read this blog have heard of the movie "Bella." In fact, it's quite possible one or both of you have seen it (a little Friday afternoon humor for you). (The picture above is me trying to make "Bella" star Eduardo Verastegui look more handsome by not shaving before meeting him at this year's "Movieguide Awards" in February. As you can tell, it was a hopeless cause and for Eduardo a traumatic experience, one from which I hope and pray he will someday recover.)

If you haven't seen "Bella" yet, please do. If you're like most audience members who have seen it, you will not only love it, but you will feel very blessed by its message of hope and redemption. If you're like me, you might want to pack some tissues, or be prepared to borrow your neighbor's sleeve once the floodgates open.

I don't want to ruin the movie for you if you haven't seen it, so I won't go into too much detail. As a screenwriter, I can appreciate "Bella" on a certain level. In my opinion, it is independent filmmaking at its best. It is a real story about real people that we can all care about. There are no effects, no elaborate stunts, no shootouts, no gratuitous violence or sex. It is what I believe a movie should be...a well-told story about people and situations that I can relate to. The dialogue is not stilted or forced and clever to the point of being obnoxious; rather, it rings true to the characters and their lives and the moments in which they find themselves. Not once did I find myself cringing at a line of dialogue aimed at showing off the writer's skills and incredible intellect. Every line flowed and made sense in furthering the storyline. In a well-written drama, great writing doesn't force itself upon you...it very subtly makes its way into your heart and head in such a way that you remember the story and characters first and foremost. That's what the writing in "Bella" did for me, and that's why the script succeeded for me. That's my opinion from a writer's perspective.

As an adoptive dad and as one who is deeply involved in orphans ministry (and adoption, in particular), I can also appreciate "Bella" on a whole other level. Indeed, where "Bella" succeeds most for me is in its simple, yet powerful portrayal of the beauty of the miracle that is adoption. It's been a long time since I've seen a movie that has such a strong pro-adoption message. In fact, I don't know if I've ever seen another movie that does such justice to adoption as "Bella" does.

I first saw the movie in May at an orphans ministry summit conference in Colorado Springs. I was moved by it at that time, but I was surrounded by 350 or so people who were also deeply committed to adoption and related orphans ministries, so it was very easy to love the movie in that setting. Then, two weeks ago, on its opening weekend, I took my wife and two sons to see it. As I watched the story unfold, and as I felt my own tears trickling down my cheek, and I heard my wife's gentle sobs next to me, I knew that it was indeed a powerful movie, regardless of the setting. But would it translate to my kids? My 12 year old, who loves "Spongebob" and "Mr. Bean" said it was one of his favorite movies ever. My 11 year old loved it, too. We will soon take our 15 year old, Ashley to see it, too. I know her well enough to know that she will love it as well.

Please...if you have time this weekend, check it out and let me know what you think of it. If you've already seen it, tell me know what you think, too. And please...don't forget to tell your friends. We need more movies like "Bella" and our wallets will determine whether or not we get them. If we don't support the good that comes out of Hollywood, then we have little right to complain about the bad!

An unexpected gift...and reminder...

2007-10-29T08:20:00.000-07:00

Each year, our church participates in Operation Christmas Child, which is organized and sponsored by Samaritan's Purse. For those who are not familiar with this ministry, it is a program through which people can fill shoe boxes with gifts, that are then sent to underprivileged children around the world for Christmas. Ministry partners follow up with the children and share the Gospel with them. It is a wonderful program. My dad has volunteered for the last couple of years at the Samaritan's Purse distribution center in Charlotte, North Carolina, helping ready the boxes for shipment overseas. He pays his own way and stays several days, working long hours, to help in this amazing ministry. He plans on doing it again this year.

We usually fill one box for each of our children (the kids help pay for the gifts with their own money). It's a great way for us to share God's love and our blessings with children whose lives are marked by poverty, and very often, despair. As we now have five children, I took five boxes after our church service yesterday.

As I approached her after getting the boxes, our 7 year old foster daughter, "A," saw the boxes and asked about them. I explained to her what they were about and she balked at first when she realized that filling one would mean that she would have to part with some of her own money (she is a real tightwad!). I reminded her of how blessed we are and how we believe it would be a good thing to share some of our blessings with children who don't have as much as we do. She began to see the reason for and the worth of doing such a thing. Perhaps she was reminded of her time in a Cambodian orphanage two years ago, just before she came to the States and entered foster care...who knows?

Then, as she took a closer look at the boxes tucked under my arm, she said, "I got one of those when I was in Cambodia." My mouth dropped open. I asked her if the box she had received looked like the ones I held. She said it did. I asked her if she liked it when she got it. She said she did. I asked her what was in her box. She remembers a white teddy bear and she remembers some combs.

In spite of our previous involvement with Operation Christmas Child, and my dad's sacrificial involvement the last two years, the whole thing became intensely personal for us yesterday. We saw the fruit of such a ministry firsthand. This was not a child in a foreign land that we will never meet. This was our own daughter who had benefited from this ministry. It hit home that all those nameless children on the videos and in the photos that we see are not just anonymous kids living in faraway lands. They are peoples' sons and daughters. Moreover, these are children that God loves immeasurably and wants to bless through His people.

Please, if your church participates in Operation Christmas Child, do your part. Use the opportunity to encourage your children to give sacrificially to others. Encourage your friends to do the same. If your church does not participate, but perhaps collects gifts for another worthy ministry, jump in and take part. If your church is not giving gifts away this Christmas, please find a local ministry or foster agency, and lead a toy and gift drive yourself. There are 143 million orphans in the world today, and countless other children living in poverty. This Christmas, let's touch as many of these precious young lives as we can with the love of God.

Why am I here?

2007-10-26T23:37:00.001-07:00

Good question. I'm here because I see a great deal of apathy and ignorance in the church today when it comes to issues of orphan care and awareness. As a foster/adoptive dad and elder in a wonderful church (Grace Brethren Church in Long Beach, California), I believe I have to take this stuff seriously. As such, I've spent a lot of time over the past few years wrestling with questions about our roles as Christians in the lives of today's orphans.

Backing up a little...okay, a lot...my wife and I talked about adopting before we were even married. Though we are medically able to have biological children, we decided at some point that we would build our family solely through adoption, and specifically adoption through the foster care system. Our sons, Anthony and Chris, entered our lives in July 2000 at the ages of 4 and 5, and our lives have never been the same. Our eldest, Ashley, was just shy of 13 when she moved into our home in January 2005. Our soon-to-be adopted 7 year-old, came to us kicking and screaming at age 6 in August 2006 (until she is adopted, her name will be withheld for legal reasons). Finally (for now), our youngest, Hallie, was 4 days old when we picked her up from the hospital in September 2006.

We are truly blessed by each of our five children, and we don't dare say that we are finished adopting. We gave God a good laugh by saying that before (after our first two), and the next thing you know, we're driving a minivan and dropping 300 bucks a pop on groceries at Sam's Club.

Back to why I am here. Our seven plus years in the foster system have coincided with a time of incredible spiritual growth for us, due in large part to the teaching of our senior pastor, Lou Huesmann, who has spent the last few years unpacking and explaining the Bible in a faithful, straightforward, simple, yet profound way that makes so much sense, and yet is so foreign to what you would hear in most churches in America today. Every week, it seems, another light bulb goes off in my mind as God's amazing plan to restore His beloved creation becomes more evident, and my small role in His plan becomes more apparent and focused.

The more I learn about the foster care system, the more I realize that there are serious problems with its basic design and implementation. The more I learn about God's plan to restore His creation, the more I realize that He has not abandoned the foster care system, broken as it is, or the children who are a part of it (broken as they are). The more I speak to fellow Christians about adoption, foster care, and orphan ministry, the more I realize that the church of Jesus Christ today is woefully lacking in the area of orphan care and awareness. Finally, the more I learn about all three of these areas (orphans, the kingdom, and the church), the more I realize that God has a calling on my life to help the church make sense of their convergence.

So...having said that, I want to join the many voices that are already out there trying to awaken the church to the needs of the 500,000 orphans living in foster care, as well as the 143 million other orphans living throughout the world today. Further, I want to show the church a glimpse of God's heart for these children, and His expectations of us as we relate to them, who are clearly among the least of these in our generation, and in turn, to help the church catch a vision for what it means to practice what God Himself has defined as "pure and faultless" religion.

That's what God has laid on my heart, and that's why I'm here.