Church agencies now get most of their funding from the government, and often find themselves doing its work at less cost than the government could do it itself. They have, effectively, become an arm of government.”
“Many mainline churches find their congregations are dwindling while their agencies expand with the help of government money.”

Do the religionists really do the job cheaper than could the government? Economists have suggested that, given the tax breaks (i.e. no tax paid) these charities enjoy, they are a huge burden on the taxpayer and the we would all be better off if the government removed the “throws” given to church-based charities and did the work itself. The recently revealed fact that many of them also operate businesses in direct competition with other businesses, but with the same charitable tax arrangements they have in their actual charity work, is cause for concern, too.

Given that the left-leaning Uniting and Anglican churches are great critics of the current government and meddlers-in-chief when it comes to government affairs such as IR legislation, security and anything else political that displeases their hierarchy, insult is certainly added to injury.

"This is practical atheism. We do not, in the end, believe in the power of God to bring about the kingdom of justice and peace. We may say we work in His name, but I fear we march on without Him."

I say march on, march on, bring on the reality based world leave behind the faith based. It has served it's purpose we now have new corner stones.

Thank you for this thoughtful and detailed analysis of the church's role. Much appreciated.

Leigh.
I share your concern about tax free church based business competing with similar secular ones. This is especially the case for some Adventist agribusinesses that operate as normal business but without the tax burden. I am not sure of the case with church based hospital run by the Catholics and the Churches of Christ, do they also not pay tax? How about the Catholic universities? The church’s involvement in the caring services grew out of their traditional welfare role and I can see some point in this continuing in that while the bottom line needs to be watched, care is not distorted by the profit motive. I notice that the Salvation Army has sold a huge retirement village in our suburb. This appears to be a change in orientation on behalf of the Salvos that the other churches might follow.

Kenny.
What am I to do with you? My point would be that the faith based approach doe reveal the real world and that the world you live in is pure fantasy. Well, not perhaps pure, but at least largely misguided.

I think there is a lot more to Peter's argument that I can gleen from one or two readings. I remain unclear as to his point: Yes indeed Churches have become arms of Government - in the same way businesses small and large are tax collectors and in some cases law enforcers on the governments behalf; but a community that has lifted itself beyond the state of a few ram shackle huts behind a clay wall tends to be a complicated thing.

And yes we have moved away from the literalism of the new Testament waiting for the Kingdom of God to return- ( Where is Baoz David when you need him! ) if there is a date on that I must have missed the email. And yes our efforts are some what misguided at times. But sitting around having an inert faith in God and his workings would not seem to be a way to get much done.

Peter seems to imply we are trying to make a Kingdom of GOd on this planet in our time - cant say I see much to support that these days. He imples we are misguided and our altruism is false or misplaced. But what does he suggest we do instead - adorn our churches and pray more!.

Ive gotta read this one again.

I appreciate sneekeepete’s confusion, this is are hard one to get across. I am not against activism. The Church must be engaged in the world and should speak about politics etc. My article is really about the basis on which it speaks and acts. It seems that much of what the church does can be described as a new kind of corporate Pelagianism. My remark about practical atheism goes to the centre of my concern. We may be active in the world only after God has been and is active in us. Otherwise we build the tower of Babel all over again, a new form of human triumphalism. Our theology tells us that God is among us in the form of the crucified and risen Christ. This is a real presence that is able to form human community into a community whose shape and action exists in the freedom of the Spirit. It is then able to act wisely in the world. O course we never know when this has happened to us; the life of faith involves trust. Neither do we go about simply believing, but with all our critical and rational talents intact.

I have been rereading Busch’s biography of Karl Barth and am amazed all over again how weak the church was in Germany when Hitler was coming to power. The Protestant church of the time, in all its forms was the liberal church writ large. It did not have the wit to see the danger that Hitler represented and many prominent church leaders went over to support the German Christians. The pastors that did oppose Hitler did so out of their faithfulness to God, seeing that Hitler was being deified by the German people. It was only faithfulness that could produce the courage of opposition.

Similarly, it is only faithfulness that will guide the Church of our day into right speech and action. No amount of sympathy for the poor or prattle about human rights will do the job.