From: George Murphy (gmurphy@raex.com)
Date: Sat Jul 19 2003 - 09:18:36 EDT
Howard J. Van Till wrote:
>
> From: RFaussette@aol.com (A quote from Alan Dershowitz, presented as an
> example of a statement on the "evils of Christianity")
>
> > The separation of church and state in America is the foundation on which
> > the first class legal status of American Jews rests. The wall of
> > separation, along with our history as a nation of immigrants, is what makes
> > America so different for Jews. The absence of a state supported church, and
> > the prohibition against religious tests for public office, guarantee that
> > Jews will never merely be tolerated, as we were - and still are - in other
> > 'host' nations. There is no hierarchy of religions in America. All
> > religions and non-religions are deemed equal before the law. But what is
> > guaranteed by law is not always implemented in practice.
> > This reality was brought home to me many years ago by my son Elon, when he
> > was beginning the fifth grade. We were living in Palo Alto California, at
> > the time, and he was attending the local public elementary school. One day
> > he came home asking: "Daddy do we have to believe in God in America?" I
> > explained to him that everyone is free to decide for himself. But I
> > wondered where the question had come from. We had frequently discussed God
> > and whether anyone could be certain of his existence, and Elon had even
> > expressed some doubts about his own beliefs with the usual preteen
> questions..."
> >
> > Dershowitz's story goes on for another page. Elon asks about 'In God we
> > Trust' on coins and objects to saying 'under God' in the Pledge of
> > Allegiance at school. Why?
> >
> > "Elon explained that if he were forced to say that this country is under
> > the Christian God, not the Jewish God, then that would be admitting that
> > this is their country more than it is ours." ppgs 313-315 Chutzpah by Alan
> > Dershowitz Simon & Schuster, 1991, (Harvard law professor, columnist,
> > appellate lawyer). #1 on NY Times bestseller list
> >
> > Now you might venture a guess as to where the attacks on Christianity in
> > the courts are coming from.
>
> If I understand this excerpt correctly, I must admit that I'm on the same
> page as Dershowitz here. The separation of church and state in America does
> indeed prevent the state, as state, from declaring that it is under the God
> of any one particular religion. I see no "attack on Christianity" in the
> quotation above.
>
> I do indeed celebrate the separation of church (representing
> institutionalized religion) and state in America. My own reflection is that
> when church (institutionalized religion) and state (institutionalized civil
> power) become one, both are profoundly corrupted.
>
> Howard Van Till
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> From: RFaussette@aol.com (A quote from Alan Dershowitz, presented as
> an example of a statement on the "evils of Christianity")
>
> > The separation of church and state in America is the
> foundation on which
> > the first class legal status of American Jews rests. The
> wall of
> > separation, along with our history as a nation of
> immigrants, is what makes
> > America so different for Jews. The absence of a state
> supported church, and
> > the prohibition against religious tests for public
> office, guarantee that
> > Jews will never merely be tolerated, as we were - and
> still are - in other
> > 'host' nations. There is no hierarchy of religions in
> America. All
> > religions and non-religions are deemed equal before the
> law. But what is
> > guaranteed by law is not always implemented in practice.
> > This reality was brought home to me many years ago by my
> son Elon, when he
> > was beginning the fifth grade. We were living in Palo Alto
> California, at
> > the time, and he was attending the local public elementary
> school. One day
> > he came home asking: "Daddy do we have to believe in God
> in America?" I
> > explained to him that everyone is free to decide for
> himself. But I
> > wondered where the question had come from. We had
> frequently discussed God
> > and whether anyone could be certain of his existence, and
> Elon had even
> > expressed some doubts about his own beliefs with the usual
> preteen questions..."
> >
> > Dershowitz's story goes on for another page. Elon asks
> about 'In God we
> > Trust' on coins and objects to saying 'under God' in the
> Pledge of
> > Allegiance at school. Why?
> >
> > "Elon explained that if he were forced to say that this
> country is under
> > the Christian God, not the Jewish God, then that would be
> admitting that
> > this is their country more than it is ours." ppgs 313-315
> Chutzpah by Alan
> > Dershowitz Simon & Schuster, 1991, (Harvard law professor,
> columnist,
> > appellate lawyer). #1 on NY Times bestseller list
> >
> > Now you might venture a guess as to where the attacks on
> Christianity in
> > the courts are coming from.
>
> If I understand this excerpt correctly, I must admit that I'm on the
> same page as Dershowitz here. The separation of church and state in
> America does indeed prevent the state, as state, from declaring that
> it is under the God of any one particular religion. I see no "attack
> on Christianity" in the quotation above.
>
> I do indeed celebrate the separation of church (representing
> institutionalized religion) and state in America. My own reflection is
> that when church (institutionalized religion) and state
> (institutionalized civil power) become one, both are profoundly
> corrupted.
Of course most American Christians think that the "God" of "In God we trust" &c
is "the Christian God." But it can also mean "the Jewish God," Allah, "the God of the
philosophers" & the deity a lot of people who "believe in God" but have no distinctively
Christian understanding of who God is. The uses of the word "God" in American civil
religion have pretty much the function of the altear to an unknown God in Acts 17.
IMNHO it would be better to omit "God" from official & quasi-official statements
such as the Pledge of Allegiance, coinage, &c. Those in the public arena are free to
use "God" language but it should be clear that they are speaking of the God in whom they
believe, not some generic deity that we all supposedly accept. This would make it
easier to distinguish, e.g., between the God who - according to some conservatives -
will ensure that environmental disaster will never occur and the biblical God who is
faithful to his promises in spite of the disasters people bring upon themselves.
Shalom,
George
George L. Murphy
gmurphy@raex.com
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 19 2003 - 09:17:53 EDT