Dear Editor,

The recent assertion that religious institutions should not receive State-assisted financial aid to restore their operations following a natural disaster reflects a narrow understanding of the role these institutions play in Jamaica’s social and developmental landscape. While such objections may be rooted in concerns about Church/State separation or prioritising the rebuilding of homes, they overlook a fundamental reality: Churches in Jamaica function not merely as places of worship but as indispensable pillars of social support, community organisation, and national resilience.

The Government of Jamaica’s allocation of $75 million to assist religious institutions affected by recent natural disasters is, therefore, a commendable and socially responsible intervention. However, when contextualised within the country’s geographic spread, population density, and sheer number of religious institutions, the allocation is modest at best. Jamaica is frequently cited as having one of the highest concentrations of churches per square mile in the Caribbean. Conservative estimates suggest over 2,500 active churches are serving a population of approximately 2.9 million people. When this funding is divided across thousands of congregations — many of them small, rural, and community-based — the assistance becomes largely symbolic rather than transformational.

This reality matters because churches in Jamaica extend far beyond the confines of weekly worship services. They operate as front line social institutions, often providing services in areas where state capacity is stretched thin or entirely absent. Their contributions include, but are not limited to, the following:

1) Mental health and psychosocial support: In a society contending with persistent trauma arising from crime, economic hardship, and environmental vulnerability, churches provide some of the most accessible forms of emotional and psychological support. Pastors, lay counsellors, and trained volunteers routinely offer grief counselling, crisis intervention, and pastoral care — services that become even more critical in the aftermath of hurricanes, floods, and other disasters. For many Jamaicans, particularly in rural communities, the Church is the only place where such support is both available and trusted.

2) Welfare provision and poverty alleviation: Churches serve as localised social safety nets. Through food banks, soup kitchens, school-feeding initiatives, clothing drives, and emergency financial assistance, they meet immediate survival needs for thousands of families. These interventions are often rapid, targeted, and sustained — operating long before and long after formal relief efforts conclude. In times of crisis, churches frequently become the first responders to hunger, displacement, and basic material deprivation.

3) Administrative and civic support: Especially in deep rural Jamaica, the local pastor or church secretary is often the person who assists residents with vital documentation such as birth certificates, passport applications, and voter registration. For many community members, the Church is the only accessible “office” for essential administrative needs.

4) Physical infrastructure for disaster response and recovery: Church buildings routinely double as emergency shelters, distribution centres for relief supplies, and meeting points for community coordination during disasters. In many instances, church halls are opened long before official shelters are declared operational. These spaces provide not only physical safety but also order, communication, and communal reassurance during moments of profound uncertainty.

Opponents of church restoration aid often point to the existence of so-called “wealthy” churches with large congregations and substantial tithes. This portrayal, however, is deeply misleading. The overwhelming majority of Jamaican churches operate on limited budgets, relying almost entirely on voluntary donations from congregants, who themselves are facing economic hardships. Many struggle to meet basic operational costs, such as utilities, maintenance, and minor repairs, even in normal times. The recent hurricane inflicted severe damage on precisely these small, community-anchored institutions, which lack the financial reserves to recover independently.

If we expect churches to continue fulfilling their long-standing role as agents of charity, stability, and community development, then restoring them to functional capacity must be viewed as a national priority. Supporting church restoration is not an act of favouritism, nor is it an inappropriate use of public funds. Rather, it is a strategic investment in Jamaica’s social infrastructure, one that strengthens disaster recovery, reduces pressure on State services, and promotes long-term community resilience.

In moments of national crisis, pragmatism must prevail over ideology. The question is not whether churches deserve assistance, but whether Jamaica can afford to weaken institutions that have historically carried so much of the social burden. The answer should be no.

Ricardo Smith

Senior educator and social scientist

ricardo.professional.edu@gmail.com