From the WSJ Opinion Archives
REVIEW & OUTLOOK
The Amen Corner
Secular fundamentalists howl about Bush's faith-based initiative.
By now there can't be a soul in America who doesn't know that somewhere in his adult life, George W. Bush got religion. And thanks to the Senate Democrats on the Judiciary Committee, John Ashcroft had to answer questions about his. With due respect to both men, however, it strikes us that their belief in the Almighty doesn't begin to match the fervor of their critics, whose own belief in government as the solution to all problems remains unaffected by experience.
That much was evident from the reaction to the President's announcement Monday that he intended to make good on his campaign vow to recognize institutionally the contributions of organized religion to America's social challenges. The effort will be led within the Bush Administration by Stephen Goldsmith, the former mayor of Indianapolis now appointed head of the Corporation for National Service, and John DiIulio, a University of Pennsylvania professor who'll run the new White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives.
That's just what has the usual suspects howling about a Constitutional Armageddon. Barry Lynn of Americans United for Separation of Church and State told Bryant Gumbel it means America "will, in fact, fund religious bigotry." Rep. Robert C. Scott (D., Va.), a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, envisioned a situation in which "a person can be told, 'We don't hire your kind.' " Laura Murphy, Washington director of the American Civil Liberties Union, called it "federal funding for religion run amok" and wondered about the threat to civil rights.
The implicit orthodoxy here, of course, is that any real acknowledgment of the contribution religious organizations make to America threatens to breach the hallowed Wall of Separation and put us on the road to becoming another Iran.
Like Mr. Bush, we have a little more trust in the American people. We don't view most Americans as little ayatollahs, itching for the chance to institute a theocracy. And as much as a shock as this might seem to much of the media elite, most Americans regard their churches and mosques and synagogues not as oases of intolerance, but as essential building blocks on America's civic landscape. Sure, there are potential pitfalls: As Mr. Goldsmith acknowledged, while the government can fund the soup in a soup kitchen, it shouldn't be funding the Bibles--or making faith a litmus test for treatment. And people who need service ought to have a secular alternative.
Still, these are not insurmountable obstacles. After all, in a country whose Supreme Court is keen to see a threat in a prayer uttered over a public address system, there will be no shortage of organizations looking to keep these faith-based groups honest. Mr. Bush's idea is pretty simple: He thinks that if you run an effective program for rehabilitating prisoners, keeping teens from getting pregnant until they are married, or teaching underprivileged kids English, you shouldn't be deprived of federal help simply because your organization is sponsored by your religion. And unlike his unbending opponents here--who, for example, remain steadfast in their willingness to see a generation of inner-city children deprived of a decent education rather than see them get one in a room with a cross on the wall--Mr. Bush is at least willing to try something new and make decisions based on the results.
That set him wondering whether there were any positive influences that might be marshaled. And he began to unearth some interesting data: for example, a David Larson study showing that the chances of an ex-criminal's being re-arrested upon release dropped by two-thirds if he had participated in Prison Fellowship Bible studies. The point is that Mr. DiIulio's ideas come from his research and his experience, not his faith.
No one pretends, least of all President Bush, that faith-based institutions will miraculously solve all our social problems. But to ignore their success, especially when set against the dismal, expensive government failures of the past 30 years, requires an inflexible theology of its own--one, moreover, that is particularly hostile to reason and experience. The Good Book tells us that faith can move mountains. Most Americans will be happy if it succeeds in moving our bureaucracies.
