Charity or a loan?

One of the main points of President Bush's reduction in "handouts" has been his insistence that charities [churches] pick up the slack.

But when churches do pick up the slack, the federal government reimburses them?

The Federal Emergency Management Agency will reimburse churches and other religious organizations that have provided shelter, food and supplies to the victims of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.
The payments with taxpayer money would mark the first time that the government has made such payments to faith-based groups at a time following natural disasters, the newspaper reported, citing FEMA officials. Read the story here.

The article says: Under the policy, religious groups, like secular nonprofit groups, will be required to document their costs and file for reimbursement from state and local emergency management agencies, which in turn will seek funds from FEMA, the report said. I really hope the churches don't do this.

Didn't Jesus say, in Matthew 6:

1 "Be careful not to do your 'acts of righteousness' before men, to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.
2 "So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full.
3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

The point of charity is to give without expecting something in return. If you give to get paid back, that is called a loan, not charity.