That said, the study reveals some underwhelming conclusions about the impact of faith-based initiatives on congregational service. It doesn't seem that much has changed since 1998. There is an increased amount of interest in pursuing various community services (and this isn't nothing), but the actual level of service has stayed about the same.
It would be worth considering what this means for Obama's faith-based initiative policies. While Obama supports the continuation of Bush's legacy here, the big questions of the past year have involved how Obama might change discriminatory hiring or proselytism rules. A lot may hinge on who exactly will be affected by any such change... if the controversy over enforcing certain norms on Catholic charities in D.C. is any indicator of the more general future, then the plateau that is faith-based contributions to social services may not be able to sustain certain objectionable adjustments to policy. On the other hand, Obama's administration may begin to 1) make good on the increased interest in faith-based community service carried in by the Bush administration, or 2) attract new religious groups to faith-based service that were not previously inclined (groups that might have had a problem with the Bush policy but are more friendly to Obama's suggested changes to the system).
Only time will tell what comes of all this, and probably other matters will keep public conversation uninterested in this particular domestic issue for the time being. And that might not be all bad, given how asinine the conversation on faith-based initiatives has tended to be thus far. With any luck cooler heads will prevail... much has been made of how Obama has continued Bush administration legacies, and this is one point of continuity for which we can actually be quite thankful.
Posts
Good post. Yes, I never understood the opposition to this as well. I don't think all restrictions that come with federal funds should be written off, though. For example, what would you say if the Westboro Baptist Church wanted some of this money? They're position on homosexuality is probably roughly equal to the Catholic Church's, and they use the exact same verses. It's a difference in style alone. But I assume you'd find funding work that they do problematic precisely because of the odiousness of the style with which they are likely to engage in their activities. There's no good justification for public funds to go to that.
ReplyDeleteAnd once it's reduced to a stylistic question, you open the door to other people's subjective opinion, and they might find the Catholic Church to be as objectionable as you find the Westboro Baptist Church.
The most obvious solution is not to get involved with religious institutions at all - to roll the whole program back. I don't think that's necessary. I think we can achieve a practical middle ground. But I don't think you can dismiss people's concerns about institutions like the Catholic Church just because you find their strategy palatable. What priveleges your (or anyone's) subjective valuation of this sort of thing? It's a tough call - I think something can work. I'm definitely supportive of the faith based initiatives - faith based groups shouldn't face barriers in their community service efforts that other groups don't face. I just think you can minimize the concerns people have because everyone receives these groups differently.
And I'm not saying you WERE dismissing people's concerns, let me just add. I'm just raising this as a very relevant question.
ReplyDelete