The report recognises that "historically, much charitable work has been carried out through the medium of religious bodies and indeed in Scotland, the Kirk, from the 16th century, was the instigator of, and the means by which, poor relief and education were delivered". This, along with an appreciation that the structures of religious bodies are often quite different from other charities, has resulted in the legal recognition of "designated religious bodies"- 10 at present in Scotland - which are currently exempt from aspects of charity regulation in order to safeguard churches and other faith communities from inappropriate state interference.

Such bodies must have been established in Scotland for at least 10 years, have a sizeable membership in Scotland, have as their principal purpose the promotion of religion and their principal activity must be public worship; they must also show adequate supervision of component parts within their organisation. The Commission start from a view that all charities should be treated equally, but recommend continuing exemption of designated religious bodies from powers of investigation, of appointment of trustees, and of temporary management by CharityScotland.

There has been widespread welcome for the proposals as "bringing clarity to charity", which should "validate the good and deter the bad" (The Herald). There are positive steps to increase public confidence in charities, and there appears to have been appropriate account taken of the special position of the churches. While much of the publicity has argued as to whether private schools should retain their charitable status, the public benefit definition seems an appropriate context for such a debate. The issue of relief from water charges is a pressing one for churches – to place such a burden on voluntary bodies much praised for their community role would be a dramatic mixed message.

The public benefit test for charities might be an interesting yardstick for the churches' work. William Temple's famous remark that "the Christian church is the one organisation in the world which exists purely for the benefit of non-members" represents a real challenge to our practice; but it is also open to challenge as to the uniqueness of its claim and its accuracy as description of the churches' activity.

Churches engage, at local and national level, as significant parts of the voluntary sector, often in alliance or partnership with "secular" groups whose practice might stand up as well as ours to the "Temple test". That is far from denying the value of the faith-based community work which has been powerfully backed by President Bush. Politicians of various parties have stressed the value of that contribution from faith communities, and the UK Government seems currently enthusiastic about seeing churches as partners in such initiatives as the New Deal for Communities. But there remain occasional concerns about exclusion from funding; there are also signs that the Scottish Executive, SIPs and local authorities may be less inclined to include faith communities as partners than is the case in England (why?).

Further, is contract based service provision the best way forward for the churches? The work of the Kirk's Board of Social Responsibility, for example, suggests that this can be combined with a prophetic role, but that can be a difficult path. What does it mean for our mission to have parts of church work financed by the state?

Whatever the answers to these questions, we cannot walk away from the commitment to the well-being of communities that we should be glad to share with other groups.