Sunny Side /South Park Super Neighborhood

Faith Based or Fake Based

Oct 21, 2002

Faith and Community Multi-Denominational
By Charles X White
March 26, 2001

The outcry of concern about faith and or religious institutions participating in the Faith-Based and Community Initiative presented by President George W. Bush should be approached with guarded and guided optimism. The concept of faith-based and community initiatives should be welcomed, as an attempt to improve and increase service delivery and improve client confidence. The debate between Church and State invokes passionate discussion but the larger discussion should be on service.
There are many views on the subject and it appears that the client?’s view and service providers are the least heard. High profile politicians and religious leaders seem to be suspended on the religious or constitutional aspects instead of the service delivery features. Charitable Choice, Welfare to Work and Faith-Based are all aimed at clients having the opportunity of receiving service at the neighborhood level for convenience and efficiency. The masses of the clients have not been polled by these voices of doubt. There is enough data to suggest that this is a very practical and logical next step in service delivery. Social, educational, criminal, employment, health and other problems have outgrown funding cycles and providers. Enrolling additional providers are needed for additional manpower and locations.
Two questions put forth concerning religion are (1) will various religious groups use this as an opportunity to finance their religious operations with federal dollars? (2) Which religious groups are really religious enough to receive funds under the faith-based concept? The latter question is becoming more of an issue than the first.
At ?“The Forum?” held on 3/21/01, De Wayne Wickham criticized Catholic leaders, for pursuing government subsidies for private school according to an editorial in the USA Today printed 3/23/01. Evangelical pastors have lashed out at Muslims and other religious groups and it seems that the worst is yet to come. Politicians are questioning how will the constitutionality of the charitable choice be implemented?
The Brookings Institution convened over twenty scholars and researchers to present position papers and encouraged dialog from an audience of providers, educators and others on the subject of faith-based organizations providing services. Their report will be released some time this year. According to the following presenters their research suggests, we need to proceed with key areas of controls.
The researchers and presenters made a very good start in analyzing the various pros and cons in this possible turn in the public policy arena. I attended three of five policy discussions held at the Brookings Institution in Washington DC.
1. December 1999 ?“The New Challenge of Urban Community Development?”
Avis C. Vital, The Urban Institute
Jeremy Nowak, The Reinvestment Fund

2. February 2001 ?“Faith-Based Organizations and the Reform of Public Education?”
Mavis Sanders, PhD - John Hopkins University
Dennis L. Shirley, PhD - Associate Dean of the Lynch School of Education at Boston College

3. March 2001 Scared Places, Civic Purposes: ?“The Role Of Faith-Based Organizations In Child Care?”
Mary M. Bogle ?– former Executive Director of Grantmakers for Children, Youth and Families
Fredrick A. Davis, Jr. - Ford Foundation
Suzanne Le Menestrel, Senior Program Officer - Center for Youth Development and Policy Research
Richard Murphy, Vice President ?– Center for Youth Development and Policy Research


Speaking as a service provider and pastor emeritus for the past seventeen years, I see no major problem with the initiative. It doesn?’t matter if it is a church or not providing the service the most important questions to answer are: location, training, accounting, policies, procedures, penalties, referral networks, data collection and client satisfaction. This initiative is a demonstration of choice, for service from a variety of locations and providers, some religious and some not, some political some not. Most denominations have a social policy in their core values of ministry as an obligation to serve the community as a whole.
Religiously speaking, saving souls is the prime function of the church. Preparing the inner man to meet with his creator. This initiative is dealing with the physical man, as did the Good Samaritan. It would appear that some members of the cloth would like to define which religion is appropriate; thank God they are not defining faith. To many the hereafter or after-life involves a government created by God full of religious souls. Our father who art in heaven hallowed be thy name, thy kingdom come on or in earth as it is in heaven. Could this mean that the government on earth will match the government in heaven?
Politically speaking, America is a free enterprise and free society founded on the principle that we earned the right to have freedom to worship whatever religion we wanted.
There is much more that could be said by many and I am sure they will. Keeping things simple just looking at the words that are contain in this initiative:
1. Faith - is none denominational
2. Charity - is a universal principle in all religions and nature
3. Choice - is a God given right; and afforded by the constitution of the United States to it citizens
4. Welfare - temporary assistance to improve the condition of the physical man
5. Work - is production; work is positive
This is by no means the totality of my views only part of a larger work. There are historical references that support this concept and I am sure that we will hear many of them. The political and religious climate during the next four years could very well be summed up as ?“The Battle in the Sky?”.