“The Catholics hate the Protestants, the Protestants hate the Muslims, the Muslims hate the Hindus and everybody hates the Jews.” Those aren’t my words, they’re Tom Lehrer’s, written many years ago and meant as satire. Like all good satire, there is truth at their core and some three decades later, the barb is still on target.
The Bush administration announced early this week that it will delay action on certain parts of its plan to route federal social services funds to religious charities. The most significant policy setback for the Bush White House to date and the congressional Democrats had nothing to do with it. The so-called “liberal media” had nothing to do with it and – God knows – internet commentators had nothing to do with it.
No, the Faith-Based and Community Initiatives Program, as it is officially known, is being pecked to death by leaders of right-wing religious groups, the same constituency Mr. Bush thought he was appeasing by establishing the program in the first place. Why would Pat Robertson and company want to look a gift pork barrel in the mouth? Because – the Catholics hate the Protestants, the Protestants hate the Muslims, et cetera, et cetera.
Like so much of the policy in Bush II, the seed for the faith-based initiative was planted in Bush I. Bush the father spoke of “a thousand points of light,” meaning once Republican-led government had slashed social service spending, the Mother Teresa Squad would come in and clean up the mess.
By the time Bush the son arrived in Washington to fulfill the covenant promised by his father, what had been an applause line in a speech had grown into an office in the White House, impelled more by urge to privatize than proselytize. If the federal government has a social service infrastructure and religious and community groups have a social service infrastructure, why not short-circuit the process, give the money to the churches and eliminate the faceless bureaucrats?
Sounds good on paper, but what’s a church? America is a country where one can become a minister with a point and click on the internet, and thanks to Mr. Bush, one can apply for one’s share of federal funds immediately thereafter.
The Protestants hate the Muslims and the Muslims hate the Hindus, remember? The religious right is not happy with the idea that the Nation of Islam or the Scientologists might qualify to participate in the faith-based charity program. “Those people don’t speak for God, only we speak for God,” or so the argument goes. It’s called parochialism. And, let’s not forget, the Black Panthers were giving free breakfasts to schoolchildren 35 years ago. Imagine what Mr. Bush’s friends at Bob Jones University would think about that.
Other people have expressed concern that for all the diversity on the American religious scene, a unifying practice is misappropriation of funds. There’s no need to name denominations, we don’t have that much time. We can all think of examples on our own.
The larger question concerns the nature of charity. Charity is a spontaneous act of goodwill toward another, with no motive beyond concern for the other’s well being. True charity is given freely, with no thought of obligation, return or – ahem – tax deduction. It’s appropriate for churches and community groups to engage in charity.
Government-sponsored social services, on the other hand, are not charity; they are the expression of an enlightened national self-interest. We shouldn’t fund Head Start or Aid for Dependent Children out of the benevolence of our hearts any more than we should fund public education for that reason. We fund social service programs because we all benefit if our citizens are healthy and our children are well-fed and well-educated.
There’s a reason the founding fathers drew a line between church and state; the line benefits both church and state, as well as those who happen to belong to both.
Ecumenism is a Four-Letter Word
“The Catholics hate the Protestants, the Protestants hate the Muslims, the Muslims hate the Hindus and everybody hates the Jews.” Those aren’t my words, they’re Tom Lehrer’s, written many years ago and meant as satire. Like all good satire, there is truth at their core and some three decades later, the barb is still on target.
The Bush administration announced early this week that it will delay action on certain parts of its plan to route federal social services funds to religious charities. The most significant policy setback for the Bush White House to date and the congressional Democrats had nothing to do with it. The so-called “liberal media” had nothing to do with it and – God knows – internet commentators had nothing to do with it.
No, the Faith-Based and Community Initiatives Program, as it is officially known, is being pecked to death by leaders of right-wing religious groups, the same constituency Mr. Bush thought he was appeasing by establishing the program in the first place. Why would Pat Robertson and company want to look a gift pork barrel in the mouth? Because – the Catholics hate the Protestants, the Protestants hate the Muslims, et cetera, et cetera.
Like so much of the policy in Bush II, the seed for the faith-based initiative was planted in Bush I. Bush the father spoke of “a thousand points of light,” meaning once Republican-led government had slashed social service spending, the Mother Teresa Squad would come in and clean up the mess.
By the time Bush the son arrived in Washington to fulfill the covenant promised by his father, what had been an applause line in a speech had grown into an office in the White House, impelled more by urge to privatize than proselytize. If the federal government has a social service infrastructure and religious and community groups have a social service infrastructure, why not short-circuit the process, give the money to the churches and eliminate the faceless bureaucrats?
Sounds good on paper, but what’s a church? America is a country where one can become a minister with a point and click on the internet, and thanks to Mr. Bush, one can apply for one’s share of federal funds immediately thereafter.
The Protestants hate the Muslims and the Muslims hate the Hindus, remember? The religious right is not happy with the idea that the Nation of Islam or the Scientologists might qualify to participate in the faith-based charity program. “Those people don’t speak for God, only we speak for God,” or so the argument goes. It’s called parochialism. And, let’s not forget, the Black Panthers were giving free breakfasts to schoolchildren 35 years ago. Imagine what Mr. Bush’s friends at Bob Jones University would think about that.
Other people have expressed concern that for all the diversity on the American religious scene, a unifying practice is misappropriation of funds. There’s no need to name denominations, we don’t have that much time. We can all think of examples on our own.
The larger question concerns the nature of charity. Charity is a spontaneous act of goodwill toward another, with no motive beyond concern for the other’s well being. True charity is given freely, with no thought of obligation, return or – ahem – tax deduction. It’s appropriate for churches and community groups to engage in charity.
Government-sponsored social services, on the other hand, are not charity; they are the expression of an enlightened national self-interest. We shouldn’t fund Head Start or Aid for Dependent Children out of the benevolence of our hearts any more than we should fund public education for that reason. We fund social service programs because we all benefit if our citizens are healthy and our children are well-fed and well-educated.
There’s a reason the founding fathers drew a line between church and state; the line benefits both church and state, as well as those who happen to belong to both.
(C) Mark Floegel, 2001