Goodstein, L. (1997, December 14). "Religious groups see larger role in welfare: The line between church and state is shifting

". The New York Times, p. 39.

(Download this article review as a PDF)

Drastic Congressional overhaul of the U.S. welfare system divided the country’s churches. On the one side, objecting to the cuts and fearing for the welfare of the poor, were many mainline denominations and the Roman Catholic Church. Applauding the cuts and hoping to see the federal government give up the welfare business to states and private charities and the poor became self-sufficient were many conservative evangelicals.

Subsequently, Jim Wallis, leader of Sojourners and convener of "Call To Renewal" and others are using the "charitable choice" clause of the welfare law as a chance to create new anti-poverty programs and bring "liberals" and "conservatives" together. They are asking state governors to redirect federal money into the initiatives of faith-based organizations and church-based initiatives.

The law’s provision allows such groups to receive federal money without compromising their religious nature. They retain their right to display religious symbols and to employ workers on the basis of religious criteria. What they are forbidden to do is to evangelize actively or to discriminate in terms of recipients of goods or services.

According to this article,

Under charitable choice, states may contract with nongovernmental and religious organizations to provide social services like job training, high school equivalency programs, courses in English as a second language, nutrition programs, homes for unmarried mothers and drug and alcohol treatment…A recipient who objects to receiving services from a church or religious group is supposed to be given the option of receiving services from another organization.

Although there seems to be broad support for this provision among different religious leaders, there are critics. Barry Lynn, a spokesperson for Americans United for Separation of Church and State says:

It will be impossible for this not to essentially pay for evangelism even though the statue says it can’t happen. There is not going to be the kind of close monitoring to make sure evangelism doesn’t happen.

Lynn says his organization is hiring a lawyer to do such monitoring and litigate should any churches or organizations overstep the law’s restraints.

Wallis, on the other hand, has seen a reticence of government bureaucracies to respond to the law’s charitable choice provision fearing that such state-church cooperation might be unconstitutional.

From the government side there have been all these objections to church-state cooperation. Some people are just terribly nervous about churches. Even businesses and foundations that don’t have those restrictions, they’re nervous too.

QUESTIONS FOR REFLECTION OR DISCUSSION

1. Do you generally favor welfare cuts and reform, or do you believe the poor must be given food, clothing, shelter, and medical care?
2. How would you work for bringing dignity through employment to the extremely poor or underclass, and what kind of support would you give young, unmarried mothers with children?
3. How would you interpret and regulate church-state relationships in a secular society?
4. Given the new welfare law, would you support the idea of charitable choice…that federal money could serve the poor through local religious groups?

IMPLICATIONS

1. Most people agree on the need for welfare reform…that it has in many cases reinforced dependency and even contributed to single parent families. No one solution seems to have emerged…most countries of the world are still struggling with the issue of poverty. Richer countries are able to provide aid which poorer countries cannot do.
2. There is broad support for the idea that local, collaborative initiatives against poverty are more effective than broad, federal programs. Most people also agree on the need for federal assistance as part of the strategy.
3. The existence of extreme poverty alongside striking affluence is a social and religious scandal. And the striking contrast of the super-rich and the destitute is present in all nations. Strategies against poverty must have support from church and state.

Dean Borgman cCYS