Faith-based politics: what congregations can and can't do

Christian Century, August 24, 2004 by Arthur E. Farnsley, II

Of Little Faith: The Politics of George W. Bush's Faith-Based Initiatives.

By Amy E. Black, Douglas L. Koopman, & David K. Ryden. Georgetown University Press, 368 pp., $49.95; paperback, $26.95.

A Revolution of Compassion: Faith-Based Groups as Full Partners in Fighting America's Social Problems.

By Dave Donaldson and Stanley Carlson-Thies. Baker, 208 pp., $14.99 paperback.

A Limited Partnership: The Politics of Religion, Welfare, and Social Service.

By Bob Wineburg. Columbia University Press, 320 pp., $62.00; paperback, $24.50.

The Invisible Caring Hand: American Congregations and the Provision of Welfare.

By Ram A. Cnaan. New York University Press, 320 pp., $60.00; paperback, $20.00.

Saving America? Faith-Based Services and the Future of Civil Society.

By Robert Wuthnow. Princeton University Press, 352 pp., $29.95.

*********

IN HIS 2003 State of the Union Address, President Bush gave Christian conservatives a wink and a nod: "For so many in our country--the homeless and the fatherless, the addicted--the need is great. Yet there's power, wonder-working power, in the goodness and idealism and faith of the American people ... I ask you to pass both my faith-based initiative and the Citizen Service Act, to encourage acts of compassion that can transform America one heart and one soul at a time" (emphasis added).

The nod was to the view that social problems are not caused by institutional detects in the government or marketplace but by individual irresponsibility--hence the solution is to change hearts and minds one by one. The wink was to a conservative, evangelical moral vision of transformation. Anyone who has ever attended a camp meeting knows that the "wonderworking power" is in "the blood of the Lamb."

As promised, Bush expanded the Charitable Choice provisions encoded in the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. Under that law, religious groups can apply as contractors without having to suspend their religious character. If they wish, they can limit their hiring to co-religionists, pray with those they are serving or read scripture to them, and keep religious signs or symbols on the walls. They cannot, of course, use government funds overtly to evangelize or proselytize because that would constitute "establishment of religion."

The 1996 law, enacted under the Clinton presidency, applied only to one specific pool of welfare money. Bush extended its legal principles to other programs and created faith-based suboffices in several cabinet departments. The federal government now encourages and supports faith-based participation by a wide range of organizations. However, Congress has lagged far behind the executive branch in embracing this shift, and the courts have not yet made a firm ruling on the issue.

Those who are interested in the nuts-and-bolts of the faith-based movement should read Of Little Faith: The Politics" of George W. Bush's Faith-Based Initiatives. It is a detailed account of legislative, executive and judicial processes, naming all the players and highlighting inside-the-beltway deals alongside public pronouncements. Those accustomed to reading analysis of faith-based reforms by sociologists, theologians and social workers can learn much from the political science perspective.

The real question facing the faith-based initiatives is not, as the media imply, whether government can fund religiously affiliated social services. Government at all levels has long given billions of dollars to contractors like Catholic Charities and the Salvation Army. Catholic Charities USA's Web site says that in 2000, 67 percent of the organization's $2.7 billion budget came from government sources. The question is whether sectarian organizations-congregations, not just religiously affiliated non-profits--can use government funds to deliver social services that promote faith-infused transformation. If the answer is yes, then congregations have considerable new latitude. But even congregations with no intention of applying for such funds are affected by the outcome, since this new way of framing the issue contributes to a public expectation that social-service delivery is the primary mission of churches. There is a growing sense that social service is what congregations can, want and are supposed to do.

After 1996 scholars and policy analysts were quick to note that African-American congregations, many of which already were providing direct social services, would be most likely to benefit from these changes and most likely" to apply for public funds. These scholars and analysts warned from the outset that evidence about the effectiveness of "transformative" faith-based programs was scant. They worried that policy was being made on the basis of rhetoric rather than data. During the past eight years data has trickled in, but its analysis inevitably has been politicized.

Dave Donaldson and Stanley Carlson-Thies's A Revolution of Compassion is a case in point. It is not merely politicized; it is a manifesto. Donaldson and Carlson Thies note that poverty is rising despite the hundreds of billions of public dollars spent to fight it. "What has gone wrong in this wealthy, well-educated nation?" they ask. "Topping the list of answers is the decline in personal responsibility of many Americans and the reluctance of too many churches to serve their needy neighbors as they should." Those irresponsible Americans need "not only help, but also hope." The reluctant church especially the evangelical church--must begin a "slow recovery from its near abandonment nearly a century ago of social concern in its fight against the social gospel and theological liberalism." To recover, the church must "seize today's opportunity to collaborate with businesses, charities, and government. America needs a revolution!"