Faith-based social service delivery in a country with low religious affiliation: The case of the Czechoslovak Hussite Church

Abstract

Faith-based social service delivery is influenced by the sociocultural conditions in which it transpires. Czechia, as a low religious affiliation country, presents specific conditions for investigating this relationship. This study is based on 10 interviews with CEOs from faith-based organizations related to the Czechoslovak Hussite Church. The findings reveal important differences between perceived meanings of faith, institutionalized religion, and spirituality in relation to social service delivery. The thematic analysis reveals a problematic relationship between these CEOs and the church, with the public presentation of religion among the main issues. All interviewed CEOs understand their social service delivery as their own individual projects and only loosely related to the church. Alternatively, they appreciate its occasional support and religious character, which also provide feelings of distinctiveness. The CEOs present social service delivery as doing everyday religion, but they presume the church sees social service delivery as useful public relations (PR).

Introduction

Questions as to the relationship between faith-based organizations (FBOs) and the state, together with the role of faith and religion within such organizations, have been repeatedly raised among scholars (Chambré, 2001; Cloke and Beaumont, 2012; Jeavons, 2004; Loue, 2017; Manuel and Glatzer, 2019). This study qualitatively examines the situation in Czechia and the Czechoslovak Hussite Church (hereinafter ‘the Church’) specifically. It draws upon interviews with 10 CEOs from FBOs related to the Church engaged in various social service delivery fields. Concerning religion, this article focuses only on Christianity due to the Czech context, where other religions are almost absent in the public sphere as well as social service delivery. The aim is to reveal the relationship of FBO-provided social service delivery in a country typified by low religious affiliation. The research questions are as follows: (1) How is social service delivery affected by the low religious affiliation in the country? And (2) how do the main actors understand faith in this context? The research covers the relationships between the particular organizations and the Church as well as its dynamics within the public space, which are expected to intertwine with one another. I chose the Church for its historically strong legacy of social service delivery.

The Czechoslovak Hussite Church is a nationalistic reformed Czech religious body just over a 100 years in age. Since it was founded in 1920, social service delivery has been a steady part of its activities. In 1924, the first social board and headquarters for social service delivery were established to organize social bazaars, funds, and community events. In 1933, an independent association of social service delivery within the Church was founded (Husitská diakonie, 2022). In 1937, the Children’s Home of Dr. Farský (named after the founder of the church) was established as a home for the children and elderly members of the Church. A historical source emphasizes leading children toward a love for God and people and living in mutual respect and unity (Pohl, 1955). Similarly, at the Institute for Elderly Members of the Church in Všestudy, founded in 1949, religiosity was axiomatically part of daily life: a prayer room was included in the building, and priests came twice a week to hold the service. In other words, in the first decades, religious distinctiveness was an important topic.

The Second World War changed the focus of the Church’s social service delivery toward refugees, disabled individuals, and health care inside families. Later, urgent care was delivered to prisoners released from concentration camps. During the communist era, social service delivery and church activities were vastly limited, with social service delivery undertaken solely within particular congregations. After the 1989 Velvet Revolution, however, services were renewed and expanded to include palliative care and assistance to individuals with disabilities as well as to members of economically and racially marginalized populations. The official Diaconia and Mission of the Czechoslovak Hussite Church registered with the Ministry of Culture was established in 1994 and renamed the Hussite Diaconia (hereinafter ‘Diaconia’) in 2016. The Diaconia now includes 12 units providing diverse social care and currently focuses on helping Ukrainian refugees as well (Husitská diakonie, 2022).

Faith-based organizations

Historically, social service delivery has been rooted in religious practice (Loue, 2017). This text, therefore, refers mostly to FBOs. I prefer this term as it points to any social service providers who refer ‘directly or indirectly to religion or religious values’ (Fridolfsson and Elander, 2012: 635) concerning its organizational culture, ethics, program, funding policies, and overall philosophy (Williams, 2016). Moreover, in this term, ‘faith’ is preferred over ‘religion’. Faith, as an individual belief, is presumed to be a much stronger motivator for social service delivery than a declared religious affiliation (Chambré, 2001; Cloke and Beaumont, 2012). For this reason, parishes and congregations engaged in social service delivery are not included in the definition as their members work via means other than organizations in which social service delivery is the prime goal and not a byproduct of religious membership (Jeavons, 2004). Finally, yet importantly, the definition of an FBO also includes publicly recognizable demonstrations of religious faith in at least one component of their ‘public face’, may these be logos, names, or mission statements (Ebaugh et al., 2003: 422). In this regard, explicit religious language (e.g. references to the Bible) is documented as more likely to be found in evangelical organizations, whereas ecumenical and mainline FBOs tend to use language that ‘is more humanistic and broadly defined’ (Kniss and Campbell, 1997: 100). This distinction also supports the argument that there are two general faith-based approaches to social service delivery: more fundamentalist and exclusive versus more liberal and open (Furness and Gilligan, 2010).

Many studies investigate what makes FBOs special in comparison to their secular counterparts. Some authors consider FBOs remarkably similar to secular social service delivery organizations, sharing with them humanistic values and low threshold access (Chambré, 2001; Davelaar and Kerstens, 2012; Herman et al., 2012). Others, however, argue that FBOs use unique resources: these may be highly motivated believing staff and volunteers (Bowers Du Toit, 2019; Ebaugh et al., 2003; Graddy and Ye, 2006) or assistance from local religious bodies with historically established access to vulnerable populations (Cloke and Beaumont, 2012). Furthermore, faith is seen to be directing FBOs in the provision of non-materialistic values, a moral compass, a sense of solidarity, and support in the search for meaning in life and individual transformation (Chambré, 2001; Davelaar and Kerstens, 2012; Herman et al., 2012; Williams, 2016).

In some FBOs, faith is included in the program via prayer, theological study, or chaplaincy assistance (Davelaar and Kerstens, 2012; Kniss and Campbell, 1997). More often, it is present implicitly: faith can be present in every part of the organizational culture: leadership, funding, daily activities, communication between staff and clients, decision-making, public presentation, and moral values (Chambré, 2001; Ebaugh et al., 2003). However, it is also argued that faith-based motivation on the part of staff can actually lead to a loss of interest in clients and more of a focus on performing correct religious values, which may be difficult to separate from a professional approach (Furness and Gilligan, 2010; Loue, 2017). Though the faith aspect of these organizations often attracts the staff of FBOs, clients are primarily seeking the social care itself (Ebaugh et al., 2003). Studies document that faith can even have a marginalizing effect, for example, when the client does not share the same value system and proselytization is a regular part of the social service delivery (Bowers Du Toit, 2019; Cloke and Beaumont, 2012; Davelaar and Kerstens, 2012; Manuel and Glatzer, 2019). Pentecostal theologies, in particular, might tend to demand submission to its spiritual culture, including the need to convert and to receive the blessing (Furness and Gilligan, 2010; Williams, 2016). Promoting a particular faith within social service delivery may also exclude LGBTQ+ individuals or raise ethical conflicts of interest about topics such as abortion, euthanasia, or contraception (Furness and Gilligan, 2010; Loue, 2017).

Funding for FBOs can also become problematic, as the organizations often prefer to refuse government funding (Graddy and Ye, 2006). In some countries, FBOs report feeling their religious aspect can jeopardize financial support from the state (Crisp, 2017; Ebaugh et al., 2003). Conversely, receiving government funding was sometimes perceived as a compromise between an organization’s religious identity and an undesired entrance into competition with for-profit organizations (Chambré, 2001; Fridolfsson and Elander, 2012). For the most part, religious institutions are responsible for the main portion of FBO funding. Concerning the role of institutionalized religion in relation to FBOs and social service delivery, Paul Manuel and Miguel Glatzer (2019) put forward an interesting paradox. They argue that even though the membership and popularity of churches in the public sphere are decreasing (they are ‘muted’), they remain highly committed to social service delivery (they are ‘vibrant’), which creates a ‘muted vibrancy’ (Manuel and Glatzer, 2019: 3). Moreover, the public appreciates their engagement in social service delivery – something the authors call a ‘reservoir of positive feelings’ for churches (Manuel and Glatzer, 2019: 14). This seems especially important in countries like Czechia where religion is generally unpopular.

FBOs operating in Czechia

In order to understand the context in which Czech FBOs are operating, a brief history of the relationship between the state and religion is necessary. With the establishment of Czechoslovakia (the First Republic) in 1918 came the first introduction of a separation of church and state; however, the later Nazi and communist regimes further limited the freedom and opportunities of religious groups. Moreover, the communist regime confiscated considerable church property, prohibiting churches from providing social and educational assistance (Hupková et al., 2015). The churches became practically dependent upon the state, including salaries for the clergy. After the country’s turn to democracy in 1989, the Constitution of the Czech Republic emphasized the new republic’s democratic and nonreligious character as its main principles (Hupková et al., 2015). Nešpor (2020) argues that the next development led to a situation where the state can only legalize the existence of religious groups with no other interference in their religious operations.

The post-revolution development of the relationship between church and state is marked by two important events: the restitution of church property and the separation of church and state in 2012. Since 1989, strong negative sentiments have been attached to ‘making the churches wealthier’ (primarily the Roman Catholic Church) through restitution (Nešpor, 2020). The media debate on this issue was framed by topics of democracy and neoliberalism (private ownership and economic efficiency) instead of the social or spiritual role of religion in society (Frantová and Haas, in press). Hupková et al. (2015: 2182) explain this as long-lasting ‘tendencies towards secularization’ in Czech society. Together with a final decision to return 75 billion CZK in assets to the churches, a financial separation of churches and the state was declared, resembling the French model of laïcité (Nešpor, 2020). The Czechoslovak Hussite Church took in approximately three billion CZK. The abundance of money reportedly caused clashes over power and the diversification of finance among different church bodies (Nešpor, 2020), which might have also influenced the self-understanding of church-related FBOs.

In general, the Czech environment has low church membership and a wide spectrum of individual alternative spirituality. David Václavík (2014) uses the term ‘apatheism’ to explain this unique combination of atheism and apathy toward religious topics. Tomáš Halík (2006) describes the Czech population as ‘believers-in-something’, referring to the form of personal spirituality that refuses to define its object of belief but does not reject the existence of transcendental entities. Moreover, a certain ‘religious illiteracy’ is observed among the Czech population, constrained by the low role of religion in the public sphere (Václavík et al., 2018). Czechs tend to prefer private, individualized, and detraditionalized spiritual practices over institutionalized religion (Nešpor and Hamplová, 2020). This is made evident as the importance of institutionalized religion is continuously decreasing in Czechia. In surveys, Czechs usually rank the churches as among the lowest useful institutions, and they are only trusted by roughly 15% of the population (Nešpor and Hamplová, 2020). Simultaneously, church membership is continuously decreasing. For instance, the Czechoslovak Hussite Church discussed in this text lost 45% of its members between 1991 and 2001 and another 60% between 2001 and 2011 (Václavík, 2014). The last census in 2021 sustained this trend, with the church falling from among the three biggest Czech churches for the first time in its history (it was outrun by the Orthodox Church, probably because of migration waves from Eastern Europe; Český statistický úřad, 2022).

How does this situation influence the FBOs themselves? To compare, in Australia, which is also characterized by low religious participation and a positive evaluation of spirituality over religion, the reliance of the country on FBO-provided social service delivery is reportedly quite high (Crisp, 2017). A loss of influence among churches is well documented, for example, in Sweden as well, which also affects considerations as to their role and identity in relation to social service delivery (Grassman, 2017). Manuel and Glatzer (2019) claim that, in many countries, social service delivery is the most admired activity of the churches. Zdeněk Nešpor and Dana Hamplová (2020) pose a question in response: While all post-communist governments in Czechia have been liberal toward religion, why have Czech churches not used the public space to present their positive face through social service delivery? In answer to this question, the authors explain that most churches have suffered from chaotic management, and many FBOs were actually established and led by believers whose bonds to the churches were rather loose. Furthermore, they focus on target groups with special needs rather than general public welfare. As a result, although FBOs play a crucial role in Czech social service delivery, the Czech public is mostly unaware of their activities (Nešpor and Hamplová, 2020). This is also the case for the Czechoslovak Hussite Church, which organizes a diaconia and gathers several FBOs under its watch.

Research design of the study

In 2022, I visited eight places where social service delivery takes place under official monitoring of the Church. These were six diaconal FBOs (out of 12) and two non-diaconal ones in four different Czech regions. During the visits, I conducted 10 interviews with two men and eight women in CEO positions. One had formerly held the position, and at one site, two CEOs were in place at the same time, sharing responsibilities. The CEOs’ experience with the positions ranged from 3 to 30 years. The sample included priests caring in parallel for their congregations, deacons, church members (including those outside the Czechoslovak Hussite Church), and unaffiliated Christians. The focus of social service delivery was extensive, including assistance to socially disadvantaged individuals and their integration and support.

All the interviews were recorded and transcribed with the informed consent of the CEOs. Furthermore, my field notes from the FBOs (e.g. notes from informal talks with clients) form a portion of the data. Because of the uniqueness of the places visited and criticism toward the Church, I use a high level of anonymization. I consider anonymity a crucial aspect of the research due to the sensitivity of the topics; without the promise of anonymity, most CEOs would not take part in the research. Thus, rather than use real names, I instead use neutral flower names to distinguish the organizations. The eight places visited during this ethnographic study were given the following names: Daisy, Hyacinth, Jasmine, Lily, Lotus, Marigold, Sunflower, and Tulip. I refrain from referring to the specific content of their social service delivery and the region as the organizations would be too easy to identify.

I conducted the research from a critical distance that attempts to keep a neutral perspective while, however, being able to recognize presumptions included within the research design (Cloke and Beaumont 2012). In my case, this is the need to adjust my secular-liberal and church outsider position toward the informants and the language I use. At the same time, I attempted what Tanya Marie Luhrmann (2022: 346) calls a ‘principle of respect’, expecting the researcher in religious studies to stay open-minded and authentically interested in the topic. Luhrmann (2022: 347) also uses the term ‘anthropological attitude’ to postulate a combination of respect, curiosity, a non-judgmental approach, and openness on the part of the interviewer.

The research, however, had very specific timing which might have affected the nature of the interviews. The majority took place at the beginning of 2022, a period that was impacted in three important ways. First, there was a loosening of COVID-19-related restrictions, which had lasted roughly 2 years at that point. The organizations were returning to pre-pandemic arrangements, and the research caught them within a transformative period with unsure plans. Second, it was the very beginning of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The event was perceived as a shock and was accompanied by a huge wave of solidarity with refugees by the Czech public. The focus of usual social service delivery rapidly shifted, and many of the organizations started to provide assistance in previously unexpected ways. Third, the new Czech government was operating with a provisory budget, which complicated the situation of social service deliverance. I believe these three factors influenced the interviews, adding feelings of insecurity and criticism toward the Church since the founder had proved less flexible than desired in times of crisis. I reflect these three limitations as much as possible in the analysis.

Each place visited is unique when considering funding, legal status, competition and cooperation with other social services, and the demands of the Church. This uniqueness influences the content and emotions of the interviews. The analysis thus had to seek patterns clear of specificity and temporal conditions. To reach the answers, I explore further questions, such as where religion manifests, how social service delivery is motivated, or what the core work is and why. The coding and analysis are conducted in line with standard qualitative procedures (Guest et al., 2012). Finally, I identify four main areas of importance within the data, which I present below in the findings section.

Findings

Religion and faith

Without exception, enthusiastic individuals with experience in social service delivery established all the studied FBOs. All eight places I visited were started from scratch. This finding confirms the suggested absence of systematic and longitudinal efforts on the part of the churches as regards social service delivery (Nešpor and Hamplová, 2020). Despite this fact, the CEOs frequently used the Church’s historical social appeal as legitimization for their own work. It was more often the historical Church rather than that of the present which helped CEOs establish the continuity and background for their actual efforts. This nostalgic sentimentality often appeared throughout the interviews. One of the CEOs commented on their understanding of the FBOs’ social service delivery with the following words:

This is how it was done in the Church during the First Republic [1918–1938], and that is the right way, that is simply the way. (…) These are the basics of where my work comes from. This is the history of the Church. These are my studies and my life experience, both socially and spiritually. (Marigold)

Based on the analysis, I assume that one reason for this past-oriented approach is that, in some cases, there is disillusionment with actual cooperation with the Church as represented by its officials. In the interviews, the Church had not proved to be a fully responsible partner. The CEOs instead point toward the Church’s mostly on-demand and ad hoc support. This model has existed since the 1990s, and, consequently, church-related social service delivery is fragmented, and there is a high level of individualization.

When asked about the role of religion in their daily work, most informants expressed that doing social service delivery actually is the religion. This way of relating to religion has an obviously implicit character. It can be summarized in the words of one CEO: ‘The way we do the social service delivery here, that is the spirituality’ (Marigold). In other words, only by experiencing their way of providing social care can the clients or visitors understand what faith really means. Moreover, they have a chance to compare the experience to their prejudiced knowledge of institutionalized religion and, eventually, correct it:

Being here, they [clients and their close ones] enter the domain of faith. They can feel it here. And I believe… that they begin to see things from different angles. And they might think, ‘I see the church is not a closed place, where you are afraid to go, where the priest stands and preaches, but is more about life itself’. And faith is to be seen alive. (Daisy)

In this quote, faith is used partly in contrast to institutionalized religion, represented by a figure of a preaching priest and a notion of exclusivity. Noticeably, the word ‘faith’ is used quite frequently in the interviews, but religion appears only a few times and always in relation to the Church. This separation in language seems to point to a certain conflict of values between how the CEOs of the FBOs relate to individual faith and to the Church, understood as representative of institutionalized religion.

In this implicit way of pointing to the religious aspect of individual faith and linking it directly to social service delivery, the Church was partly excluded from the FBO’s identity. In two cases, this exclusion went so far that the CEOs are considering removing the Church as its supporter. This was a result of years of experience, during which they reportedly felt unrecognized or unappreciated for their work, missing financial and emotional support at important moments. To my question about their relationship with the Church, one CEO answered ambivalently:

I usually get zero feedback from the Church on my work. I do not know anyone who would actually try to understand us. And, when there is someone, they search for ways to make us churchier, more uniform. Or they come up with something that makes your life harder. But it’s true that in times of crisis, they would not let us fall; we have felt their help. (Jasmine)

Generally, the lack of any feedback was a common topic in the interviews. In other words, the CEOs often felt overlooked by the Church in their work. Though the CEOs draw inspiration and motivation from the Church’s sociohistorical legacy, in reality, they claim it necessary to rely on their own personal skills and networks.

Diaconia and PR

As suggested above, the Church is viewed by the CEOs as a specific founder and partner in social service delivery. This collaboration has its obvious advantages. For example, the board meetings of the Diaconia are reportedly organized in a friendly and relaxed atmosphere. The following statement was intended to reflect a positive relationship with the Diaconia (represented, however, by a single person who occasionally shows interest):

I feel the support of the Diaconia. They call me from time to time and ask how we are, if we need anything. This is supportive within an environment where no one else is interested. Therefore, I am always happy to hear from this one person. It is nice. (Daisy)

The next quotation also mentions the lack of interest from the Church and its Diaconia. However, where the previous CEO sees an uninterested environment, the second one views it as respecting personal freedom, which brings about ambivalent feelings:

The Diaconia gives us a lot of freedom; its board gives us freedom. Being at the meetings, I always try to push them a little. I want someone to come and visit us, see the clients, talk to them a bit. Maybe the clients would tell them more than me. However, it is problematic for the board members to find time to come. (Lily)

This CEO shared a need to persuade the Diaconia members to experience the social service delivery themselves and step down from their monitoring position. The invitation can be interpreted as an attempt to disrupt the border and shift the symbolic bond to a more concrete collaboration. The individual perception of the freedom provided is also obvious in the next quotation on the relationship with the Church:

It is kind of surveillance in a way. Most times, I can just do what I want to. (…) The board meeting – that is a formality, no set questions. They [members of the board] just sit together with me, have coffee, have a snack, and go home. That’s what it’s like. (Marigold)

Nevertheless, for some CEOs, this freedom meant being left to their own destinies. Money was a crucial concern here. The Church was usually willing to provide some older buildings or financial loans on demand, but in general, the CEOs felt their organizations were underfunded. The Church’s support was evaluated as reactive rather than proactive and, therefore, sometimes even arriving too late:

When we were really in trouble, they [the Church officials and Diaconia members] just did not care. Repeatedly, I heard that they did not have money, and they could not help. Maybe it was true. However, it was really frustrating. (Lotus)

Some CEOs compared the Church to an inspector who has no real interest in the social service being delivered and its daily problems. Rather, the CEOs reported that social service delivery was viewed by the Church as an attractive activity that should be promoted and publicly displayed:

I feel there is this thought from the side of the Church: ‘We have a diaconia. We can proudly show it’. But when someone from the Diaconia needed help, they were told there was no money. I deeply dislike this. (Tulip)

The question of funding was a reoccurring issue within the interviews, often connected to reported feelings of uncertainty and apprehension. However, as mentioned above, some CEOs perceived this as a bitter paradox, where their work is used as effective PR for the Church but remains without its reliable support. The following short story reflects an experienced striking contrast between the different expectations of the Church’s role in the organization of social service delivery:

Some time ago, we organized a public event here, and I invited the Church officials. They wanted to serve mass in our facility. OK. So, we prepared a room inside the building to make the mass calmer. We arranged a silent place for those who wished to attend the mass (…). The Church officials arrived only for the mass, and they did not like our idea of holding it in that room. In the end, they left without a single prayer. I was extremely shocked. I could not believe it when one of them told me, ‘I will not hold a mass here, closed in a hidden room’. The priest only wanted to be in the limelight. (Sunflower)

This CEO interpreted the shameful situation as a conflict between the expected roles of the Church in the public sphere with respect to social service delivery. Moreover, the quote opens a complex set of issues for the CEOs of church-related FBOs: being recognized by the Church, presenting oneself in an expected way, and finding the Church using social service delivery as a publicly popular topic for its own sake (compare to Manuel and Glatzer, 2019). In other words, the situation is depicted as a conflict of priorities and lived realities that diverge too far from one another.

Insider negotiation

Another important topic when considering the role of religion is the FBOs’ approach toward their clients and their employees. In all the studied FBOs, insider religious activities like meetings with the priests or Bible readings are voluntary. One organization has a chaplain to assist clients when they ask for their presence. If the FBO organization culture was to be generalized, in my words, it would state that nobody should be forced into anything when it comes to faith and religion. The following quote describes this approach to religious activities in relation to employees:

The religious meeting is optional, so we do not force anyone into this. Those who want to can come, and it is viewed as their working time, like a person is, in fact, at work. (Lotus)

Regarding employees, very few of them are actual members of the Czechoslovak Hussite Church or any church at all. They are social service providers, first and foremost. However, according to the CEOs, believers or Church members would actually be the preferred employees as they are expected to bring some added value:

Q:

You spoke about your idea to make it all more spiritual than it is now. What would that mean?

Tulip:

Well, I would like to have people here who believe. We do not want to push the clients, force them into anything, not at all! But it would make a difference to have such employees. (Tulip)

Believers would be expected to be more patient, tolerant, and sensitive to the spiritual needs of the clients. Simply put, they would be insiders within the organizational culture, one that implicitly sees ‘social service delivery as the religion’. However, believing social service providers are difficult to find, especially in regions with low levels of religiosity. On the other hand, in line with the implicit presence of religion and the ‘do-not-force’ rule, some CEOs felt a need to regulate some openly religious employees. The following quote is a nice example of this careful negotiation of the right portion of religion and faith in social service delivery:

Daisy:

I had to negotiate and communicate quite a lot about how exactly to incorporate the religious aspect into the work. With one evangelical employee especially, we had to make clear what to do and what not to do. And it works really well now.

Q:

What should they ‘not do’? Not bring the Bible?

Daisy:

Exactly. And they should not say ‘hallelujah’ or ‘God is great’. They should focus on listening and asking things. (Daisy)

Concerning clients, the CEOs still seem to find themselves in search of the best way to mediate the religious aspect of the organizations toward the clients. As the quotations show, in the case of religious activities, clients are also given a choice. Religious activity is only an offer they can accept or refuse:

I don’t tell my clients to visit the meetings with the priest. I don’t want them to feel that they have to come or should come or that they are being pushed. If they are interested, they contact the priest themselves. (Lily)

The voluntary aspect is emphasized so much so that clients are not even invited to come to religious activities. It is hoped that they will find their own inner motivation themselves instead of being pushed in any possible way:

We organize religious events, readings, and meetings in the church building. We do this for the clients. But I really think hard about how to mediate this for them. This will never be obligatory, you know? But how to attract them so they would feel it makes sense, not just coming because I want them to come. (Tulip)

At the time of the research, all the CEOs were trying to renew their pre-pandemic organizational culture. Hand in hand with rethinking the activities, they strived to establish a new spark of inner motivation among the insiders. This can be interpreted as a sign of extreme cautiousness when it comes to explicit religion as the CEOs are aware of the stereotypes and fears related to institutionalized religion in Czechia. Their awareness is also nurtured by experience:

Most of our clients have a prejudice [toward religion]. I meet them daily. But they wouldn’t come to a religious event (…) just because this is a church. This is a church event in their eyes. (Sunflower)

The CEOs learn to work actively with this prejudice. They consider faith an important part of their work and strategically plan how to include it and make it acceptable. The following example demonstrates the careful work with religious activity:

During social service delivery, I like to include a prayer. But I always say, ‘Us, the Christians, we pray like this. And whoever wants to can join us’. (…) I want all the activities to be of a low threshold: short, interesting, and literally for everyone. (Marigold)

The intention is clear. The religious part should be inclusive and attractive, not boring and elitist. This character of religion appears here as an interesting contrast. Some earlier quotations pictured the Church as distant, superior, and uninterested. The Church was described, in very explicit language, as using social service delivery as a way of representing institutionalized religion. Nonetheless, the CEOs appeared generally very careful in regard to what the Czech majority refers to as ‘believers-in-something’ (Halík, 2006). Especially for this segment of the population, it seems extremely important not to use religious terminology explicitly. This approach can also be viewed as respect for ideological diversity and one’s individuality, and it is widely applied to insiders:

When we have a client who is a tough Catholic believer, to this client, we send a worker who is Catholic as well. Because some spiritual work can be done in this case. In addition, we won’t send a worker [who works] with chakras there. (Daisy)

This quote documents the overall trend among interviewed CEOs: recognizing the individual spiritual needs of their clients and employees and respecting them. This, however, does present an interesting potential conflict for a faith-based and church-related organization. The tolerance and openness toward ideological pluralism can threaten the character and identity of the particular organization, which is strongly related to the search for organizational distinctiveness.

Creating a public face

Using the terminology of Helen Rose Ebaugh et al. (2003), the CEOs use different ways to create a ‘public face’ for the FBOs. Based on previous research on Czech FBO re-entry programs, a carefulness in referring to religion within the public sphere could be expected, for example, using secular language or mentioning religion as an added aspect at the end of mission statements (Beláňová et al., 2022).

Starting with the logos of these FBOs, these can be mostly regarded as religious. They widely include references to Christianity in the form of images or words. As specific examples cannot be shown here due to the anonymization, illustrative examples would be a cross or the Ten Commandments. The use of Christian symbolism, however, relies on public knowledge of the topic. Considering the reported ‘religious illiteracy’ (Václavík et al., 2018), what function these logos fulfill could be open to speculation. My impression is that, in most cases, they remain unchanged since the foundation of the FBOs in the early 1990s. In this way, they present more the historical legacy of the founding personalities (often priests) than a tailored communication code toward the public.

Coming to the names the organizations use, similar to the logos, some FBOs use references to biblical names and places. Others could be called ‘ambiguous’, to use the term of Ebaugh et al. (2003: 415). They refer indirectly to religion or the Bible but sometimes with words understandable only to Christian insiders, for example, ‘path’ or ‘light’. However, some names are simply related to geographic location (e.g. region, hill), or they use neutral names referring to nature (e.g. names of trees). Another example was this conscious consideration of the founder, who was aware of the Czech environment:

In the beginning, a CEO from the same social service delivery field gave me advice not to use a religious name or the name of a holy person because the church is not involved in social service delivery as fully, and also, it would make us less popular. (Daisy)

In the mission statements FBOs use, they employ broad spiritual vocabulary rather than religious terminology. This means that few direct references to the church environment are to be found as opposed to more general but still spiritual language. Jasmin’s CEO confirms that this negotiation requires hard teamwork within the FBOs:

We have been working on a vision of the organization recently, and the basic things were quite easy to find agreement on. But there is one part, a small part, dealing with our churchiness. One page, a few sentences, and we have worked almost half a year on that. (Jasmin)

Similar to the approach toward insiders, events open to the wider public are very carefully organized concerning religion. In general, these events are not primarily planned to attract attention to their religious side. Religious aspects are not masked but are also not promoted. Recall the quote from Lotus where mass was intentionally held inside the building, not on the performance stage of the facility – in this case particularly, this approach may have conflicted with the Church’s expectation. However, the planning of a public event also includes another kind of stereotypical expectation from churches and religions that must be dealt with. The negative stereotypes present among the Czech public also include fears of being manipulated and forced into unwanted activities (prayer, donation, interaction with the clergy). These expected stereotypes disturb the image the CEOs’ wish to create: caring, faith-based social care. Thus, it was typical for the CEOs to carefully read such expectations, drawn from personal experience, and to prevent disappointment or discouragement. Still, the CEOs reported that they felt a different expectation from the Church:

When we really need help, they somehow find a way to keep us from falling. But support? We instead feel regulations. Once in a while, they remember us, come, and explain how we should show our relationship to the Church more visibly. (Jasmine)

The public face of the FBOs thus becomes another example of how the CEOs view their ideas as differing from that of the Church.

Discussion

The original research intention was to uncover how religion and faith are understood within the social service delivery of FBOs in a country with low religious affiliation. The setting is very specific and, in the end (and somewhat surprisingly), led the analysis to the complicated relationship between the CEOs and their Church. Many critical points were raised from their position, reflecting mostly the expected role of religion as an institution and faith as an individual belief in daily life as well as in broader society. In this way, the sociocultural context of the country emerged as important in forming actual self-understanding and behavior among the involved actors.

In the interviews I conducted with the CEOs of Church-related FBOs, the CEOs generally tend to be careful in communicating what they view as the religious aspect of their work. They report being aware of sensitivity to the religious topic among their clients and employees as well as the wider public (i.e. potential clients and supporters). Whereas, in the eyes of the CEOs, the Church opts for the explicit presentation of religious aspects to create a nice self-portrait, the FBOs prefer universal human values alongside implicit and subtle references to faith. They also expect that such an approach could even allow for the correction of some prejudices concerning institutionalized religion in the country. To compare, among Czech FBOs engaged in re-entry, this trend has been documented too: Christianity was presented as a kind of social movement in their mission statements (Beláňová et al., 2022). Sana Loue (2017) documents that FBOs are currently in an era of development typified by a tendency to define their stance toward universal humanism. The FBOs related to the Church seem to follow a similar path, trending toward a liberal and open character instead of an exclusive and fundamentalist one, the two main described directions of FBOs internationally (Furness and Gilligan, 2010).

Among the interviewed CEOs, the strong social appeal in the first decades of the Church is still being used as a legitimizing narrative. It seems that such attempts to frame current values and activities by pointing to the foundations of the Church are a rather universal tactic among FBOs (Askeland et al., 2019). In this way, the Church (or its past) plays an irreplaceable role in the identities of these FBOs. However, in some, the original idea, related strongly to the faith-based motivation of the founders, has shifted closer to a focus on practicing social service delivery and interpreting that as the basis of the faith. Susan M. Chambré (2001), in this regard, speaks about religion transiting from a leitmotiv to a rather spiritual component in an organizational culture. In this particular study, such a change often seemed to occur with a change in CEO and fluctuations among employees. This identity shift is further affected by the decline in Church membership, with fewer employees and clients committed to the particular Church ethos. This development, on the contrary, might predict a further future loosening of the bonds to the Church and the becoming of more mainstream social organizations. It has been documented that Czech religious organizations are viewed as more moral when they present themselves as ‘responsible neoliberal private owners’ (Frantová and Haas, in press). Conversely, the research documents that some FBOs fear bigger professionalization might decrease the faith-based motivation of their volunteers (Fridolfsson and Elander, 2012). The CEOs in my sample also raised concerns about having non-believing employees who cannot ‘make the difference’ in the social service delivery provided.

Thus, the question of these FBOs’ distinctiveness is at stake here – an important topic, for example, among Czech church schools as well (Rybanská and Spalová, 2022). In fact, distinctiveness in relation to the country’s religious situation may become a crucial issue for the future development of the FBOs and the Church. Eva Jeppsson Grassman (2017) notes a very similar problem when investigating the Church of Sweden’s role in social service delivery. She documents a conflict between the theological language used to describe social service delivery and the actual practice, where religious elements are avoided so as not to scare clients. She describes this as a dilemma between strengthening the distinctive religious character of an FBO’s identity and the risk of losing its uniqueness. Analyzing the Czechoslovak Hussite Church, the Church is indeed pictured as the one proposing traditional religious distinctiveness, whereas the CEOs claim to search for ways of incorporating faith in their work without frightening the public away. In this context, the situation especially of countries of low religious affiliation should be further analyzed. It is apparent that such context generates a specific set of strategies that FBOs might use to fulfill their aims: carefully reflect the approaches of actual and potential clients and employees; rethink the public self-representation based on the previous experience; adapt the activities and practice to include the religious aspect only implicitly; or avoid an explicit language when it comes to religion.

Conclusions

The aim of this study was to describe the specific case of the Czechoslovak Hussite Church, namely, social service delivery provided by FBOs in a country typified by low religious affiliation. The research covered two fields: the relationship of particular organizations to the Church and its dynamics within the public space. The conclusions depict an uneasy situation: all the interviewed CEOs understand their social service delivery as their individual projects, as very loosely related to the Church. Nevertheless, they appreciate its occasional support and the religious character in the background that provides them with a reported feeling of distinctiveness among the wider public. The CEOs present social service delivery as doing real everyday religion, whereas the Church is present mostly symbolically. In the eyes of the Church, the CEOs presume social service delivery is a useful way to promote the Church itself to the public. This experience, however, generates a problematic relationship where the public presentation of religion in a country of low religious affiliation becomes one of the main points of discussion. Aware of the precarious state of institutionalized religion among Czech clients, employees, and the overall public, CEOs interpret religion as care for individuals, respect for diversity, and accessibility. Within such a definition, religion takes the shape of universal human values. Moreover, a voluntary principle is very important when it comes to activities of a religious nature. This is a positive strategy given Czechia’s low religious affiliation in that it also lowers the potential for clients to be marginalized.