Did Judas care for the poor?

Pat Patterson of Plano says that we have to have government socialist programs because the church has never been able to take care of all the poor. Well, if the government got out of the way and let Christians keep the money they earn, the church would be well-equipped to take care of the truly poor. But neither the church nor the government is obligated to take care of the lazy and/or those who have family to take responsibility for them. Christians are obligated to take care of those who are "orphans and widows indeed" -- that's those who are over the age of 60 years and have no family. All the biblical admonitions to care for the poor and needy are to the church, not to the government. The poor are to be cared for with Christian love, not government-confiscated money. Jesus never advocated taking money from one person to redistribute to another. In fact, there was an admonition to those who made a big deal out of "caring for the poor" with other people's money. Remember when the disciples criticized the woman who broke the alabaster box of ointment and anointed Jesus' head? They opined that it should have been sold instead and the money should have been used for the poor. In another passage, the Bible indicates that Judas, who kept the purse, didn't really care for the poor -- he was more concerned about the money going into the purse. The implication is that he was not averse to dipping into the purse for his own benefit. Jesus' response was, "The poor ye have always with you." I think he meant that there will always be lazy people around with their hands out, and there will always be crooked politicians who use them to promote their own wealth.

"Church can't care for all needy." The Dallas Morning News; April 1, 2010; p. 12A.