terfaith Allia e In nce Th and The I nte rf ai th A l l ia n c e F o u n d a t i o n 2 0 0 1 A N N U T A L R E P O R PeoplePeople ofof FaithFaith andand GoodGood WillWill RestoringRestoring HealthyHealthy DemocracyDemocracy Dear Friends: Never have I been more proud of The Interfaith Alliance than I was this past year. September 11 was a horrific day in world history, one that will be remembered with sadness and anger for generations to come. But those of us in the daily practice of spiritual leadership know, too, that we have a unique obligation in such times. The men and women of The Interfaith Alliance and The Interfaith Alliance Foundation are not all clergy; indeed, mine is the only ordination in our national office when our board members are not in town. Our staff reacted to the tragedy as would a pastor, imam, priest, or rabbi, reaching out to lend support and resources to those in pain, working to prevent anti-Muslim and anti-Sikh backlash and to help bring communities together. Our local Alliances and national boards sprang into action as well. Some scheduled unity events, some reached out to Muslims and Sikhs, and some met with political and religious leaders in an effort to gently guide them toward messages of inclusion. All demonstrated in word and deed the positive, healing role of religion in our society. Although we have grown and expanded our programs significantly since we were founded, we remain very much true to our original calling. We believe the nation and religion are healthiest when religion can express itself without fear of entanglement or encumbrance from the government. We have not wavered in our opposition to abuses or manipulation of religion for partisan political purpose – whether they come from the political right or left. In 2001, we saw dramatic examples of both the power of religion to divide and to hurt as well as to inspire and to heal. Though we sometimes saw the vocabulary of faith appropriated for partisan political purposes, from time to time, we also heard the prophetic voice of faith calling us to our better nature, urging us to feed the hungry and house the homeless. This year of sharp contrasts instructed, inspired, and challenged us. The tragedy of September 11 focused the public’s attention on issues related to the appropriate role of religion in public life. Indeed, we have redoubled our efforts to enable the people in our nation to better understand the proper relationship between religion and government. Gratitude abounds for all of you whose generous support has made our work possible. We are proud of what we accomplished in 2001, pleased to share with you information on our work during this important year, and eager for you to share in our pride even as you continue to share in support of the mission of this movement. The Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, Executive Director Introduction public life. But we also took on new and important roles, unique among Washington-based organizations: working to assist clergy around the nation in their post-attack pastoring, communicating a message of inclusion For the world, the nation, the and acceptance for true Islam, and religious community, and for The working to ensure the legislative Interfaith Alliance, 2001 was a year response to September 11 did not like no other. harm the liberties Americans hold As it did for all Americans, the year dear. divided into two distinct chapters: All of this activity – before and before September 11 and after. Before after September 11 – took place amid the horrible events of that world- important organizational growth and changing day, The Interfaith Alliance development. The Interfaith Alliance’s focused all its energies on defending membership grew significantly in the appropriate role of religion in the 2001, as did the capacity of its public policy sphere and ensuring the network of alliances across the nation. full spectrum of religious voices was Similarly, the organization began heard in policy debates. That entailed building its National Religious The Honorable David Dinkins and Sarah Weddington work on a number of high-profile Leaders Network, an assemblage of issues, including campaign finance religious leaders from around the reform, the Ashcroft nomination, and nation who add still more grassroots network of well-organized and well- a still unresolved struggle over the reach and provide rich religious funded organizations, for the “voice of administration’s plans to provide perspectives. religion,” as if people of faith in more federal dollars to religious In all its work in 2001, The America speak with a single, institutions as part of its “faith-based Interfaith Alliance and The Interfaith monolithic voice. The Interfaith initiative.” Alliance Foundation sought to bring Alliance proved otherwise in 2001, After the terrorist attacks, The diverse religious voices to the policy demonstrating, as it has in the past Interfaith Alliance (TIA) and its arena, so the full breadth and richness and will again in the future, the partner organization, The Interfaith of America’s faith communities could Religious Right cannot claim the Alliance Foundation (TIF), continued be appreciated. Too often political mantle of faith for their particular to defend religious liberty and leaders mistake the Religious Right political views alone. promote the proper role of religion in political movement, with its vast “The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state and never its tool.” Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 3 Mobilizing Faith Communities America’s faith community offers a worship, thereby allowing for direct unique, prophetic vision to the nation, funding of religion. The proposal was one that is vital to the health of the a key element of candidate George W. American political process. Therefore, Bush’s message of “compassionate The Interfaith Alliance works to conservatism” during the 2000 mobilize communities of faith. Sadly, presidential campaign. because the Religious Right sometimes has the loudest and most expensive WELFARE REFORM AND megaphone, its arguments are CHARITABLE CHOICE mistakenly credited with being “the religious point of view.” The Interfaith In truth, the Clinton administra- Alliance knows Americans of faith do tion’s 1996 welfare overhaul had already not all march in lockstep and regularly ushered in the era of charitable choice. reminds political leaders of the rich But that administration took a far more diversity of thought and belief in the limited interpretation to the matter, faith community. essentially limiting funding to the same “Despite the spin and In 2001, that effort was particularly religious-affiliated institutions that had media attention devoted important, as a new administration always been permitted to apply for fed- to charitable choice sought to secure passage of “charitable eral funds. The Bush administration legislation, there remains choice” legislation which had made clear it had a much more aggres- a serious lack of profound and disturbing implications sive approach in mind. substantive information for religious institutions, as well as for Once in office, the new president and thus meaningful the appropriate and vital role of moved quickly to pursue the initia- debate on this issue religion in public life. tive, establishing a White House within houses of worship The heart of the president’s Office of Faith-Based and Community in this country.” proposal was a plan to shift Initiatives to craft his related legisla- The Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, government responsibility for tive proposals. Almost immediately, Executive Director, March 16, 2001, providing social services to houses of the initiative faltered. And for good Washington, DC “Charitable Choice” in Practice In June 2001, TIA Executive Director The Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, in partnership with TIA-Oklahoma City, participated in an Oklahoma City forum on charitable choice. Oklahoma was the first state in the nation to take advantage of the Bush administration’s newly relaxed standards for funding religious groups to provide social services under the 1996 federal welfare law. The state’s early organizations than another experience highlighted some of the religious organization. However, problems critics have warned about. what does that say about the Gaddy explained. recipients of this money? Why must “Here in Oklahoma, you have $100,000, which could have gone distributed $100,000 to an to social services, be used to cover evangelical Christian organization administrative costs? And, which named as the liaison between the non-Christian religions are likely to government office and various be willing to work with an religions. The rationale behind the organization whose historical action reflected wisdom – a purpose has been not to help them government office will have more do their work better but to convert difficulty dealing with religious them to Christian work?” 5 reason: what had been a winning both with legal and ethical issues, piece of Campaign rhetoric when from the perspective of the religious painted in broad strokes was a well- institutions affected. nettled thicket of complex issues when The guide touched on the full translated into public policy. range of concerns about charitable The administration’s apparent choice, issues emphasized by The intention was to minimize debate over Interfaith Alliance Executive Director the proposal’s very significant prob- The Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy in his lems. But the vague “we’ll work out many speaking appearances on the the details later” promise was cold subject. Among them: the threat to comfort to many in the faith commu- constitutional separation of religion DEBATES ACROSS THE nity.