The Exquisite Corpse home archives submit black market comrads hot sites search
The Exquisite Corpse - A Journal of Letters and Life
Edited by Andrei Codrescu
ec chair poetick kultur anti-amthropomorphism
gallery zounds the making and unmaking of person
new economics of late capitalism
diaries and memoirs translation and her retinue
working class sweat
the corpse reads classics letters the book of revelations and epiphanies
the making and unmaking of person
The Book of (Demotic) Revelations and (Common-sense) Epiphanies

Old Presidents and New Theocrats
by Gary Sloan

On the editorial pages of U.S. newspapers and at sundry Web sites, proponents of an impregnable wall between church and state intermittently clash with modern theocrats who would delve beneath the wall and, as Hamlet might say, "blow it at the moon." Whether the immediate provocation be placement of the Ten Commandments in a courthouse, Bible classes in public schools, school prayer, school vouchers, public display of the crèche, tax exemptions for churches, federal funds for faith-based initiatives, or judicial interdiction against the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, the new theocrats seek to undermine the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. A favorite ploy is to attribute pious remarks to the first U.S. presidents. The remarks, some spurious, are supposed to demonstrate that the most eminent founders of the nation sanctioned state furtherance of religion.
    Hence, in his farewell address to the fledgling nation, George Washington, the theocrats often point out, warned that when the body politic is devoid of religious sentiment, the nation must suffer: "Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle." On a similar score, John Adams is customarily cited: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." A local guest columnist theocratized Washington in a brazenly evangelical way. "The mission of America and the church is one and the same: to further the cause of Christ," the father of our country supposedly averred.
    The early presidents, it seems, were all devotees of Scripture who deemed the Bible a desideratum for both governor and governed. Did not Washington postulate that "it is impossible to rightly govern without God and the Bible"? Did not Adams eulogize the Book: "I have examined all religions, as well as my narrow sphere, my straitened means, and my busy life, would allow; and the result is that the Bible is the best Book in the world"? In the theocratic eye view of American history, James Madison, the father of the Constitution, was an ideological forbear of Judge Roy Moore. After all, it is (falsely) alleged, Madison remarked, "We've staked our future on our ability to follow the Ten Commandments with all our heart."
    Do such testimonies, whether authentic or fabricated, to the worth of religion validate a liaison between church and state?
    Hardly. Even if it could be shown that the "religious principle" heightens civic morality and nourishes polity, it doesn't follow that the state should conspire with the church to inculcate the principle. The state has no expertise in soul making; that is the bailiwick of the church. If the church falters, it shouldn't expect the state to bail it out.
    Nothwithstanding the above quotations, the first presidents were scarcely gung ho for institutionalized Christianity, supported or unsupported by the state. In an 1831 sermon delivered in Albany, New York, the Reverend Doctor Bird Wilson, an Episcopal minister and historian, advised parishioners that "the founders of our nation were nearly all Infidels." Certainly, the first five or six presidents fill the bill.
     In their private correspondence, they inveighed against "superstitious" or "dogmatic" Christianity. In an 1816 letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Adams mused: "How has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?" In a kindred vein, Thomas Jefferson wrote Adams: "I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition [Christianity] one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded upon fables and mythologies." Jefferson concocted his own version of the Gospels, expurgating the miraculous, legendary, and dogmatic elements. Vetoing a bill granting public lands to a church, Madison observed: "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." James Monroe was a loyal friend of Thomas Paine, author of the incendiary Age of Reason, which skewered the Bible and national religions.
     Given their distaste for clericalism, it isn't surprising that the presidents wanted to quarantine the national government from sectarian contamination. Washington reminded members of the New Church in Baltimore that the nation had no religious bias: "In this Land the light of truth and reason has triumphed over the power of bigotry and superstition. In this enlightened Age and in this Land of equal liberty it is our boast, that a man's religious tenets will not forfeit the protection of the Laws, nor deprive him of the right of attaining and holding the highest Offices that are known in the United States." The Treaty of Tripoli, carried unanimously by the Senate and signed into law by John Adams in 1797, specifically disavowed any proprietary influence of Christianity on shaping the guiding principles of the new government: "As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion, it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Musselmen [Muslims]."
     The first presidents left ample evidence that they favored a broad interpretation of the Establishment Clause. The testimony of James Madison, since he was the prime mover of both the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, is especially enlightening. In an 1803 letter objecting to the use of government land for churches, Madison wrote: "The bill in reserving a certain parcel of land in the United States for the use of said Baptist Church comprises a principle and a precedent for the appropriation of funds of the United States for the use and support of religious societies, contrary to the article of the Constitution which declares that 'Congress shall make no law respecting a religious establishment.'" As president, Madison vetoed an 1811 bill giving a charter to an Episcopal church to dispense charity and education in the District of Columbia. He said the bill would blur "the essential distinction between civil and religious functions." In an 1822 letter to Edward Livingston, Madison noted that strict separation of church and state benefits both: "Every new & successful example therefore of a perfect separation between ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance. And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion & Government will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together."
     Despite the demurrals of wistful theocrats, separation of church and state is an even better idea today than it was in 1791, when the First Amendment was duly ratified. The nation is far more pluralistic now than it was in its formative years. Once, an intrusion of Christian baggage into the affairs of state was prejudicial to few since nearly all citizens were at least nominally Christian. Now that the nation includes twenty to thirty million (estimates vary) agnostics, atheists, skeptics, freethinkers, and secular humanists, state aggrandizement of theism, even when stripped of sectarianism, is inevitably discriminatory.
     In his recent State of the Union address, George W. Bush plumped for legislation allowing religious organizations to receive federal funds even when they pursue religious agendas and engage in discriminatory hiring practices. He complained that "government has often denied social service grants and contracts to [religious institutions] just because they have a cross or Star of David or crescent on the wall." He was determined to rectify the putative injustice: "By Executive Order, I have opened billions of dollars in grant money to competition that includes faith-based charities. Tonight I ask you [Congress] to codify this into law, so people of faith can know that the law will never discriminate against them again."
    In a January speech in New Orleans, Bush characterized the Bible as the ideal handbook for carrying out child-care services at a local church. In the same speech, he enunciated the messianic intent of his administration's faith-based initiatives: "We want to fund programs that save Americans one soul at a time."
    Instead of agitating for an amendment to ban homosexual marriages, the new theocrats should reexamine an amendment cherished by old presidents and trampled by the latest avatar to High Office.




home archives submit black market comrads hot sites search ec chair peotick kultur anti-amthropomorphism
new economics of late capitalism gallery zounds the making and unmaking of person
diaries and memoirs translation and her retinue
the book of revelations and epiphanies working class sweat
the making and unmaking of person the corpse reads classics letters

©1999-2004 Exquisite Corpse.
Site design by Compulsive Creations.