Not Occasions for Government to Push Piety

With several notable exceptions, presidents going back to George Washington have issued proclamations encouraging prayers of thanksgiving. In 1952, Congress passed a joint resolution, signed by President Harry Truman, setting aside one day a year for prayer. Since then, presidents have proclaimed a day for prayer.

There is nothing wrong with the American people getting together to pray on a designated day, even public officials. In fact every day should be a day of national prayer. The church-state rub comes when the government declares it to be such and exhorts citizens to engage in a religious exercise. Indeed, in 2002, then-chaplain of the Senate, Lloyd Ogilvie, even wrote a prayer for the American people to use. (How many times did Roger Williams, John Leland and other Baptist freedom fighters roll over in their graves!)

As the question suggests, not all presidents have issued prayer proclamations. In addition to Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, the author of Virginia's Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom, refused to issue a thanksgiving proclamation because he believed it was both unconstitutional and unwise. James Madison, Jefferson's cohort in liberty, was no less opposed to such proclamations. Madison did issue several prayer proclamations while president, apparently stooping to political pressures. Years later, however, he recanted.

Madison gave five reasons why a religious pronouncement should not be handed down from civil magistrates -- even presidents. First, a declaration of a religious holiday can never be enforced by the sword of civil government. "An advisory Gov't is a contradiction in terms," Madison wrote. Second, the government is not in any sense entitled to act as an ecclesiastical council of synod with the moral authority to "speak to the faith or the Consciences of the people." Third, such proclamations tend "to imply and certainly nourish the erroneous idea of a national religion," an idea Madison condemned as anathema. Fourth, such declarations inevitably use the terminology and theology of the dominant religious groups and are, to that extent, majoritarian in their flavor. And, fifth, such proclamations carry the grave risk of using religion to serve the political ambitions of the moment. (Edwin S. Gaustad, Faith of Our Fathers, pp. 55-56.)

As church-state controversies go, presidential proclamations establishing a day of prayer are not particularly egregious breaches of the wall of separation. After all, there is little, if any, actual coercion affecting one's conscience. But actual coercion has never been the standard for judging whether government has overstepped it bounds in endorsing religion. Also, it is helpful to understand that two of our most influential founders -- Jefferson and Madison -- either opposed religious pronouncements in principle or refused to issue them in practice.

Encouraging our country to repent and pray on designated days is altogether proper. We certainly can use it. But it is more appropriately called for by pastors, rabbis and imams among us -- not civil magistrates, Congress, or even an American president.

Adapted from J. Brent Walker's recent book, Church-State Matters: Fighting for Religious Liberty in our Nation's Capital, Mercer University Press, 2008.

By J. Brent Walker  |  November 19, 2008; 3:04 AM ET  | Category:  Religion & Politics
Share This: Technorati | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: Day of Prayer? Neither Here Nor There | Next: All Free to be Thankful to God

Posted by: Farnaz2 | November 20, 2008 1:08 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Posted by: justillthen | November 19, 2008 2:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Posted by: lepidopteryx | November 19, 2008 11:43 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.