An continuation on one of our traditional topics:
Public Piety Required
By Richard Cohen
Thursday, August 9, 2001; Page A19
Shortly before George W. Bush went off on vacation, he convened his Cabinet and, from the picture on the front page of many newspapers, had them all wear red ties and bow their heads in prayer. As Bush has no Jews, Muslims or professed atheists I know of in the group, we may assume they all prayed -- as they say -- from the same page.
Bill Clinton, in semi-contrast, had several Jews in his Cabinet (no Muslims or atheists, though), but he, too, sometimes held informal prayer sessions. One took place at Camp David early in his administration and, according to someone who was there, of the Jews, only Commerce Secretary Mickey Kantor stayed away.
Before Clinton, we had Bush the Elder, not so publicly pious as his son, but not a man to shy from religion, either. He, of course, was preceded by Ronald Reagan, who was always thanking God for this or that and who famously championed religion in public life.
If I am allowed one more president, the next in reverse order is Jimmy Carter. He not only was a declared born-again Christian but also returned to Plains, Ga., almost every Sunday of the presidential campaign to attend church and Bible school at the Baptist Church. The record will show that I attended one of those sessions. The record will also show that it did no discernible good.
I mention these examples of presidential piety to suggest that (1) Bush is different only in degree, not in kind, and that (2) it makes me scratch my head whenever anyone mentions how religion has been banished from American life. This lament, so intrinsic if not essential to the conservative moment, is heard so often and at such volume that it has attained the status of a Big Lie -- an untruth repeated so often that it goes unchallenged.
It's true, of course, that prayer -- not God -- has been banished from the public schools and occasionally some public official misunderstands the intent of the Supreme Court and forbids the innocuous or the clearly legal. But for the most part, America -- alone among the major Western democracies -- remains an exceedingly churchy country where religion plays a large and unashamedly prominent role.
In fact, religion or references to it are everywhere. Sporting events often begin with God being beseeched for, as it were, a winning touchdown. These prayer sessions are certainly not hidden and, in some cases, are conducted in brazen contempt for the law. This is not the behavior of timorous people who think they are living in an oppressively secular society.
Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) campaigned proudly for the vice presidency as an Orthodox Jew and, to the dismay of many Jews, was widely praised by Christians for the depth of his belief. The important thing, apparently, is to be orthodox about something -- it does not really matter what.
As an orthodox secularist, I see nothing inherently wrong with most of this. If a politician wants to make a declaration of faith, then by all means let him do so. I am, however, troubled with the religion of religion becoming the quasi-official religion of the state. Had I been sitting at Bush's Cabinet meeting, I would not have been wearing a red tie (I don't own one), and my head would not have been bowed, either. I might have felt a trifle uncomfortable, though.
More to the point, maybe, is how Bush might have felt about me. When he peeked and saw that I did not have my head bowed, would he have written me off as, well, just the sort of person he did not want in his Cabinet? This is what some Justice Department officials wonder about Attorney General John Ashcroft, who holds daily prayer meetings at headquarters. If you don't attend, what will Ashcroft think? If you do attend, will that bring you closer to the boss?
In a sense, both Bush and Ashcroft are setting an implied religious qualification for office -- not a particular religion, mind you, but a requirement that you believe in something. This is why Ashcroft's people trotted out an Orthodox Jewish attendee to praise the Justice Department prayer sessions. Significantly, only the supporters spoke to the press on the record. Critics sought anonymity, a sure sign they feared the boss's disfavor.
No doubt Bush would be surprised to hear me say it, but I would not feel comfortable at one of his Cabinet meetings -- and not because I differ with him politically. It is because he has -- unintentionally, maybe -- created an implied admissions policy whereby only the religious need apply. Strictly speaking, that may not be unconstitutional, but it contradicts Bush's repeated campaign pledge. When it comes to religion, he is a divider not a uniter.
© 2001 The Washington Post Company |
