Title: Doubts of biblical proportions Source: Daily News, 02/13/2001
Author(s): E.R. Shipp
AN: 2W71971075770
Database: Newspaper Source
Doubts of biblical proportions

My initial response to President Bush's "faith-based" social services delivery system has been skepticism. But not the undue alarm evident in the voices of some television journalists who automatically raised the specter of the government funding the Nation of Islam or the Church of Scientology.

One doesn't have to focus on extremes to feel unease about the president's proposal. Black Americans, perhaps more than most, have long looked to their churches, and more recently, mosques, as centers of communal life. All about Harlem, Brooklyn and the Bronx, one can see the result of the faithful in partnership with government to rebuild neighborhoods.

And while many religious institutions staunchly oppose mixing their God with their government, their prayers with their politics, others have not been so hesitant. Members of the clergy have been looked to for political guidance and served as vocal advocates of social justice.

Prayer and protest have gone hand in hand. The trick is knowing where to draw the line, so that, as the Scripture commands, they render unto Caesar that which is his and unto the Lord that which is His.

From time to time, some clergy have crossed the line, commingling money from one pot with that of another, robbing Peter to pay Paul, as it were. Some members of the clergy have proven more adept as wordsmiths than as accountants. But anyone taking up this challenge must do so with eyes wide open, books in impeccable order.

And they must be on guard against selling their souls for 30 pieces of silver by permitting government money to influence what they stand for and whom they choose to serve. It is not a good thing for the government to steer monies to faith-based institutions if this places the government in the position of choosing one community over another in furtherance of a specific partisan agenda. It is not good if it means that Bush and his aides essentially will ordain a cadre of acceptable "leaders." It is not a good thing if recipients of the services are coerced into accepting the faith of the givers.

Bush and his team-John DiIulio, who heads the new White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, and Stephen Goldsmith, the president's chief adviser in this area-have sought to allay all fears.

But one still feels skeptical that they can pull this off constitutionally.

"Government, of course, cannot fund, and will not fund, religious activities," Bush has said. "It can fund the soup. It can fund the shelter. It shouldn't fund the Bibles," Goldsmith has said.

The president has acknowledged that government cannot "be replaced by charities and community groups" in such areas as public health and civil rights, and he vows that no one will be coerced into accepting services from a faith-based organization: "As long as there are secular alternatives, faith-based charities should be able to compete for funding on an equal basis and in a manner that does not cause them to sacrifice their mission."

When are "secular alternatives" more illusory than real? Encouraging volunteerism and charitable giving is one thing; providing financial backing to churches and similar institutions is another. On this one, call me a doubting Thomas-one of little faith-that this is the wisest course.

X X X

ABOUT THE WRITER

E.R. Shipp is a columnist for the New York Daily News. She won the Pulitzer Prize for commentary in 1996. Readers may write to her at the New York Daily News, 450 West 33rd St., New York, N.Y. 10001.

X X X

PHOTO of E.R. Shipp available from KRT Direct.

X X X

(c) 2001, New York Daily News.

Visit the Daily News online at http://www.nydailynews.com

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.

Go Back