Originally posted by Salimar
for a family who were really homeless and in need
This is the problem: they are uncertain whether the family was actually homeless and in need.

If this family's home was not really destroyed, and they weren't really in need, they defrauded the church and should be made to pay for it. On the flip side, you're correct, if they were really in need of a home and a new start, there shouldn't be a problem with them selling the house and moving away.