When God became Man more than 2000 years ago, Christians believe, God broke through time, place and space to become one of us. The seen and the unseen were reunited in that act of grace.
The one-ness of God, combined with the distinctly Catholic message of inclusion of all, are two notions which ought never be separated. The emphasis on the all-encompassing nature of the deity can be skewed to promote an authoritarian notion of God. Yet the poignant story of the poor baby born in a stable reminds Christians that God-with-us means God for every last one of us.
Yet it is becoming apparent that God's caritas—which Catholics express in acts of care for the old, the sick, the prisoners and the poor—is being appropriated and manipulated for the political convenience of the State. Further, the State appears to be intentionally creating a two-tiered system, with very different outcomes for different sections of society.
Last month's discussion paper from Catholic Social Services Australia (CSSA—formerly Catholic Welfare Australia)—A Job Network for Job Seekers—rightly complains that onerous government requirements of service providers will make the provision of the Job Network financially unviable. The report says that the costs of service provision are increasing, and not being met by compensating fee adjustments or indexation.
"The choice is simple. Does the Australian taxpayer want Job Network providers to be focused on 'playing the system' as a means of business survival, or on providing real assistance aimed at re-establishing unemployed job seekers in the workforce permanently with an accompanying reduction of public expenditure on allowances?" CSSA fears that if it is to act in accord with its Christian principles, the 'system' will ensure CSSA goes broke.
Should Catholic charity be beholden to the State?
Concern that Catholic charity easily slides into 'welfarism' is widespread. Conservative commentators such as Samuel Gregg see government subsidy of Catholic charity as inevitably an attack on Catholic identity: "The ability of church welfare groups to express religious commitment has been muzzled by contract and neutered by subsidy," Gregg writes.
An example of this occurred in 2005, when Melbourne's Archbishop Denis Hart issued a memo to all staff directing them not to comment on the introduction of the new IR laws. Archbishop Hart's action was a clear example of Gregg's point: Centacare Melbourne alone receives 36 per cent of its revenues from government. Catholic schools in Victoria receive approximately $1 billion