The holy war has begun.
On a recent edition of the CBS program "Face the Nation," Stephen Goldsmith, picked by President Bush to head the new office of Faith Based and Community Initiatives, sounded the official call to arms.
He said, "If you are homeless and you don't want to be mixed up with a religious organization, you should have an option. Government should never force you through the front door of a religious organization. If, however, you have a choice of a faith-based organization and you, the individual, choose to go there and you have to pray before your lunch meal, you should be required to pray."
I unequivocally agree with Goldsmith's comments. Let me use the faith-based ministry for homeless and abused women and homeless families that I direct here in Albuquerque as an example. It is entirely privately funded. As such, we have a constitutionally guaranteed right to require attendance at religious services for those staying at the shelter, while recognizing that homeless people have that same right not to stay if they do not wish to attend church services.
However, that requirement to attend church services would have to end if my organization began accepting government funds. The changed lives that result from the mandatory religious education component of our "faith based" program - so much admired by the government and its ostensible reason for wanting to cooperate with ministries such as ours - would have to cease being a requirement and instead have to become an option.
I can already hear some of you saying, "Well, that doesn't sound so bad, does it? You would still be able to preach the gospel and if the homeless don't want to hear, well, that's their prerogative, isn't it?"
True, in part, but I wonder if you would still use the same argument when dealing with, say, a secular rehabilitation program where therapy classes are both mandatory and expected. In fact, required attendance at such sessions is considered to be an integral part of the overall rehabilitation process. Individuals who elect not to attend such classes would not be granted a whole lot of sympathy.
Well, operators of "faith based ministries" consider mandatory attendance at Bible classes to be just as important and much more effective than secular therapy sessions. So, if you just cannot stand the thought of some poor soul being required to attend a Bible study, why don't you think it in terms of the scenario I've described above?
If ministries are indeed really "faith based," it is impossible for them not to share their faith or "proselytize," as the federal government and others so cutely puts it.
For once I agree with the ever-acerbic Barry Lynn, executive director of the group Americans United for the Separation of Church and State. Appearing on the same "60 Minutes" program as Goldsmith, Lynn commented, "The big problem is, it is impossible, literally impossible, to separate your religious activities from your secular activities in these programs ... You can't just turn off religion when the spigot opens and there's a federal dollar coming out, and then go back to being religious when it's a private dollar. That is not how these faith-based organizations, in fact, work."
True, Mr. Lynn, very true. With that in mind, I have no doubt that, sooner or later, those organizations that decide to accept federal dollars will capitulate to the ever-present government restrictions and cease preaching the gospel in any meaningful way. Those that don't will end up getting embroiled in costly and painful lawsuits.
In part, I am convinced of that because of the amount of anger I see in the commentary and e-mail I read from some non faith-based homeless advocacy groups. A number of homeless activists appear that they will stop at nothing to cause trouble for faith-based organizations.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
One of the more articulate responses read, "So already (as a non-Christian) as things stand, I have fewer choices, they (Christians) have more. And if GW (President Bush) & Goldsmith get their way, that existing inequality will certainly increase, unless there are very tight controls on proselytizing on the services that receive government funds."
With the battle now in full swing, it looks like the "holy war" is about to get decidedly unholy.
