Commentary: Government-funded initiatives must keep faith
5/21/2001 News media contact: Linda Green · (615) 742-5470 · Nashville, Tenn
NOTE: A head-and-shoulders photograph of the Rev. Dorothy Watson Tatem is available.
A UMNS Commentary By the Rev. Dorothy Watson Tatem*
Charitable choice" and "faith-based funding" are becoming widely discussed terms, from local churches to the halls of Congress. The merits of making government funds available to faith-based organizations are being widely debated.
The concept is hardly novel. For years, faith-based organizations such as the Salvation Army and Catholic Charities have received substantial government funding. The money has been used strictly for services to communities and not for religious purposes. All of these organizations have had to comply with government standards to receive continued support. Social services rendered have been evaluated and all funds accounted for. Government funds have not been co-mingled with those of the religious organizations.
Government support for faith-based initiatives can have a positive impact on local communities. It is important, however, that the initiatives themselves not lose their faith -- or the strength of their witness -- in the process of accepting government funds.
Processes for funding religious organizations have been in place for some time. Legislation for charitable choice, which has been passed four times with bipartisan support, permits all 353,000 congregations in the United States "to compete for government social services funding regardless of their religious nature."
No new funding dollars exist, but faith-based organizations can attempt to appropriate funds from the same source as social agencies. John DiIulio, the executive director of President Bush's faith-based funding initiative, notes that 40 percent of government service dollars goes to nonprofit organizations. Each religious organization makes the decision to seek government funding based on its mission and willingness to comply with regulations.
The criticisms abound. To name a few: The volume of paperwork involved is too great for small faith-based groups to handle; large organizations with experience will be favored over smaller ones when funds are awarded; the jobs created will depend on the perpetuation of poverty; religious groups will be endorsed with public funds; and the faith that undergirds religious communities will be undermined. This is not an exhaustive listing.
On the positive side, money is being made available to help faith-based groups expand what they have been doing all along.
It is imperative that government funds not be co-mingled with those of religious entities. A religious organization can avoid trouble on this point by establishing the faith-based initiative as a 501(c)(3) corporation - that is, a private, nonprofit corporation separate from but related to the religious entity. Faith-based initiatives that do not take that step must set up a financial reckoning process that includes bank accounts distinctly separate from those of the religious organization.
Cookman United Methodist Church, led by the Rev. Donna Jones, is the only local congregation of any faith in Philadelphia that has received more than $100,000 in charitable-choice funding. To strengthen the church's direct involvement in the Welfare to Work program, the congregation and pastor decided not to create a separate corporate entity. Instead, a separate financial system supervised by someone outside the church ensures that funds are not co-mingled.
Critical to the debate about charitable choice is the question of whether religious organizations will lose their faith in God as they aggressively compete for government dollars. Most such groups share a commitment to nourish the whole being of a person individually and corporately. This requires looking beyond what seems immediately possible or even rationally sound. These organizations intrinsically strive for a more spiritual, creative and life-giving existence.
When religious organizations scramble for the same funds as other social services providers, will they neglect teaching and holding their members accountable for sound stewardship practices? Will religious organizations become spastic should such funding cease, or will they remember that in their histories they had "to make bricks without straw?" The striving to do that is at the core of our faith.
The government should be seen as one volunteer among the many committed to work with communities to improve local conditions. Faith ceases when government is perceived as the primary or critical resource for the organization that is providing services. To become rich in straw is to lose the very exercise of the spiritual muscle that makes the faith-based organization more than just a social service agency.
Faith-based groups offer hope and inspiration beyond the tangible. Charitable choice expands the opportunities for faith-based organizations to serve. This is a viable partnership as long as religious organizations keep the faith! # # # *Tatem is director of urban ministries for the United Methodist Church's Eastern Pennsylvania Annual Conference.
Korean News
