The boundary between church and state in the United States has changed constantly over the nation’s history. Regardless of its position on the political landscape, it has always been there a fence signifying where the majority of Americans believe the government has no business meddling in the affairs of religion and vice versa. That boundary was severely shifted with the implementation of President George W. Bush’s federal funding for faith-based organizations. The programs have successfully helped many people in Boston and across the nation, while faithfully adhering to strict federal guidelines. However, their effectiveness is undermined by the overall breach of that boundary between the beyond and the bureaucracy. Both church and state must take a closer look at this link and see if it really serves them.
The effectiveness of faith-based organizations within local communities is not in doubt. Working on a purely local level and strengthened by the deep convictions of their faiths, these dedicated groups are able to reach out on a level government often cannot match. They can also pick up the slack when citizens slip through the cracks with federal funds, 11 groups were able to provide guidance and opportunities for nearly 3,000 teenagers after the city of Boston slashed funds for summer job programs, The Boston Globe reported.
Just as important, faith-based groups that are receiving federal dollars are taking the necessary steps to prevent that money from funding purely religious matters instead of secular ones, according to the Globe report. Organizations are hiring auditors and consultants to navigate the perilous backwaters of government funding, making sure funds are not misspent, according to the Globe. And the organizations have been serving all who request their charity and gifts, not just those of the same religion. Overall, the individual churches, mosques, synagogues and other religious institutions seem to have used their allotments wisely and fairly.
However, their effectiveness runs up against ideology both their own and that of our government. A religious organization, even though it may refrain from proselytizing and preaching, is bound to its beliefs above all; those beliefs, by their very definition, are exclusionary. The federal government, while it may have many flaws, is based on the inclusion of all citizens. Proponents of Bush’s program may point out that no one is being forced to accept aid from faith-based organizations, and many other options are available. But this holds true regardless of whether the federal government funds religious organizations or not. Money that is taken from America’s citizens regardless of religious beliefs should not be returned through the funnel of religion.
No matter how inclusive a religious community attempts to be, it will still exclude some citizens. This is not a disagreeable quality in and of itself again, religious communities are made strong by their traditions and beliefs. However, it means that such organizations should not be given the ability to administer to all citizens. That is the government’s job, and if inefficiency is the price that must be paid for equality, so be it. Our leaders in the government should recognize this and religious leaders should recognize it as well.
Religious organizations have been diligent in ensuring they use their government funds properly, and they should be commended for such. However, their diligence is exacting a price of its own. By recruiting the necessary advisors necessary to regulate their funds and busying themselves in money management, they are focusing on material matters and not on the questions and doctrines that have directed them for thousands of years. No group but those within a religion should ultimately guide it on its mission. Just as religion can subtly influence government action, the barrage of rules and regulation the government brings to its affiliates can shape their policies as well. Several religious leaders have rejected the government’s helping hand, preferring to rely on internal support. Those who are coming to rely on government support should look to their example, and remember the roots that made them potent agents for social change in the first place.
While it is administered, organization should continue to use the exacting standards that are currently in effect. And in the short run, federal dollars for these religious organizations has definitely reaped extraordinary results. In the long run, though, monetary gains pale before the erosion of two strong, separate ideologies into one confused entity. Robert Frost once wrote that ‘good fences make good neighbors.’ Organized religion and government should not refuse to acknowledge each other and recognize each other’s importance. They should just do so from their own sides of the fence.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
