Faith and politics: The rhetoric of church-state separation

Criticism of religiously motivated contributions to public policy debate is largely misconceived. It assumes that the mischief which constitutional separation of church and state is supposed to cure is a domination of the state by the church. This presents only one side of the story. Subservience by the church to the slate should also be avoided. The law of a liberal state is legitimate to the extent that it does not conflict with the basic moral values of its citizens. Therefore, an ongoing conversation about basic values is necessary. Allowing churches and individual believers the freedom to make distinctive 'religious' contributions to this conversation is consistent with the separation of church and state. It is an aspect of the liberal democratic state's obligation to listen to all perspectives on difficult moral issues. A close relationship between church and state, on the other hand, has the capacity to impede the conversation.

'Faith-based' organisations and contemporary welfare

This paper explores issues arising from the welfare reform process in the United States and Australia. The involvement of faith-based organisations in both countries has evolved in different historical, social, political and cultural contexts. The paper will explore three main themes. First, it examines the relevance of the term 'faith-based' to describe the nature of the relationship between charities and churches in the mixed economy of welfare in the Australian context. Second, it provides a critical analysis of the reform processes, suggesting implications for the future of church-based organisations. Third, it maps directions for cross-comparative research of church-based social services provision in both countries.