|
Religio and American Civil Religion
Michael A Rizzotti
In memory
of my grandmother Augusta
With
this essay we propose a reassessment of American civil
religion developed by Robert N. Bellah. The term was
originally coined in 1967. The idea was expanded in his
books Beyond Belief and Broken Covenant
published in the nineteen seventies. The recent Religious
Right’s political activism has somewhat changed the
landscape of American civil religion, inaugurating a state
of religious and political exceptionalism. Shattering
the idea of a cultural and political inclusiveness inherent
in civil religion. As a result of the changes, a
reevaluation was deemed appropriate. To do so we examine
Roman religio as a case study of civil religion.
American civil religion consists of
references to God or divine providence present in The
Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the
content of inaugural speeches delivered by American
Presidents.
Although American civil religion has
Judeo-Christian tenets and background, Bellah dispels any
suggestion that it has rigid traditional Christian doctrinal
content or origin, or is a substitute for Christianity. He
contends that civil religion has a similar unifying role and
function as religion, but is specifically political. As
such, it appeals to all the people with different religious
backgrounds.
To Bellah, American civil religion is an
expression of the American experience in terms of a
transcendental ethical vision. This
interpretation of the universal and transcendental is only
meaningful if made in relation to the origin and destiny of
the U.S. political model of freedom and democracy. Bellah
further points out that the God of civil religion is a God
of order and freedom rather than of love and forgiveness. It
is a God mostly concerned with the history and destiny of
the United States of America.
The term “civil religion” was taken from
Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s The Social Contract. It
referred to a belief system that supports the political
authority of the State. In order to favor the endorsement of
civic authority Rousseau recommended the development of
social harmony through the Roman concept of pietas
–piety.
A term that has a wider meaning than “religion” and extends
to the correct relations with parents, friends,
fellow-citizens and the gods: “Piety is justice with regards
to the gods” wrote Cicero
–On the Nature of the Gods.
Let's direct our attention to the
Roman model of civil religion defined as
religio.
Religio
The history of Roman
religion is a complex subject that spans a period of over
one thousand years. One that deserves a more elaborate study
than the one provide by the following synopsis. Regardless,
our goal is to outline some basic reference to illustrate
the development of Roman religio in order to relate
some elementary analogies with American civil religion.
Roman history
encompasses a period from the creation of Rome and its
growth. It spans from its mythical foundation in 754 BC, to
the establishment of the Republic in 509-27 BC and to the
expansion of the Empire 27 BC-AD 476.
The Roman civil religion
consisted in the knowledge that the gods were benevolent
partners of the mortals in the management of the world for
the benefit of all citizens. It relates to the traditional
honors paid to the gods by the state. And was based on the
liberty of its citizens to establish beneficial relations
with the gods founded on reason rather than fear.
For the Romans, the most
favored forms of myth was history, more specifically Roman
history. Beginning with Rome’s mythical foundation by
Romulus and Remus. The two brothers who were nurtured by a
she wolf –a symbolic representation of discipline and of
cooperation of pack hierarchy against a prey or an
adversary. The symbol also attests to the power of
collective bond, where the individual does not exist except
as a member of the community.
According to the myth,
Remus was the first sibling who saw a flight of six
vultures, inaugurating the practice of auspices performed by
the magistrates. But it was Romulus who saw twelve birds. As
a result, Romulus was given the honor to found the city and
give it his name. He then proceeded to draw with a plow the
sacred boundaries of the Palatine. This prompted Remus to
jump over the “wall” to spite and ridicule his brother.
Seeing this, Romulus leaped on Remus and killed him, saying;
So perish whoever henceforth crosses my walls! From
then on, the scrupulous respect of prescribed boundaries
have been sacred.
The term religion is
derived from the Latin religio, described by Cicero
as the pious cult of the gods. The etymological
meaning of the word is still a matter of debate and
contention. The word has two different connotations. On one
hand it implies religare, meaning “to bind” or
“ritual link”. On the other hand it implies relegere,
“to pick up again” or “to re-read”. The first emphasizes the
ritual links between the gods and the mortals. The second
underlines the need for a scrupulous observance of religious
ritual practices.
Giorgio Agamben points
out in Profanations [1] that religio emphasizes relegere.
A scrupulous separation between what belongs to the gods and
what belongs to the mortals. A strict juridical boundary
between the sacred and the profane. Hence, the religious
system of the Romans was not founded on dogma but on the
scrupulous observances of prescribed rituals. For the Romans
it was not so much the lack of faith that was scandalous to
them but the lack of meticulous application of ritual
procedure: The negligent observance of what separates the
sacred from the profane. Hence, Religio did not
designate any direct, personal or sentimental relation
between an individual and the gods, but the correct
performance of prescribed rituals bequeathed by tradition.
The opposite of
religio was superstitio. The irrational fears and
excessive devotion to rituals and the gods that might
threaten the stability of the religio of Rome. People
were referred to as superstitious in respect to their
excessive behavior for being under the blind control of
their gods.
By the end of the second
century AD the word superstitio began to be used in
respect to the religious practices of foreign people.
Although the Romans had no trouble with Christian or Jewish
beliefs, and in general tolerated them, they nevertheless
classified them as superstitio. The principal
accusation against the Christians and Jews was the slighting
of Roman religio.
There were numerous
Roman gods. Each had its own specific function and profile.
None of the gods were individually all-powerful. Romans were
typically open to other gods. All non-Roman deities were
accepted as long as they also respected public order, the
liberty of other practices and the preeminence of Roman
public cults. Some foreign gods were also integrated in the
Roman pantheon. Baal and Isis for instance, where venerated
as supreme deities in their own cultures and were accepted
as such in Rome yet shared their power with other gods.
Romans were respectful of other religions and were careful
not to insult foreign deities. When referring to foreign
gods they used the formula Siue deus siue dea
–god-or-goddess– in order not to offend a deity whose name
was unknown or was not yet revealed to the Romans.
Roman gods each had
their own function and collaborated with each other. The
more important ones had more prominent temples and greater
festivities. The most powerful gods were the Capitoline
triad consisted of Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. Jupiter’s
epithet was optimus maximus, meaning “the best and
the greatest”. His favorite weapons were thunder and
lightning. All other gods were terrified of him. He was
fearsome and fearless. It is said that that the only person
he feared was his wife Juno. Juno’s function was defense and
childbirth. Her epithet was “the Queen”. The last member of
the triad was Minerva, whose function was technology. She
supported the artisans and doctors. The following is a short
list of some known deities:
Deity
Function
Apollo Good order
Diana Procreation
Great
Mother Warding off catastrophe
Isis Safety
Janus Beginnings
Mars Warrior violence
Mercury Journeys
Mithras Hope of support
Neptune Underground
streams, the sea
Venus Irresistible
charm
The gods legitimized the
power of mortal kings and emperors. They represented the
eternal essence of power in contrast to the mortal nature of
Rome’s rulers. They symbolized order and continuity of the
power system.
The Romans were not
known to be irrational people. However, one aspect of their
religious practice known as auspices, might have been
perceived as such. The term originally meant the observation
of the flight of birds –mostly vultures. Eventually the
choice of the more manageable chickens and the observation
of their eating patterns were used by the magistrates.
Auspices, referred to a technique that revealed the will of
the gods to mortals. Especially in reference to important
political, military and economic decisions facing Rome.
Auspices were regarded
as a formal procedure necessary for any decision to be
legitimate. Magistrates typically performed them. The
technique was not used to seek the gods’ advice, but
consisted of a recitation of a prayer that confirmed the
gods’ agreement with the official who consulted them.
Auspices were more like a divine endorsement of the decision
already made by the magistrates. It was a formal way of
legitimizing a verdict. The decision however could be
challenged by an official of the same or superior rank. If
contested, the judgment typically rested with the official
with the highest rank in the civil hierarchy.
The Latin word sacer
means sacred: Trebatius a contemporary of Cicero defined it
as, All that is the property of the gods was “sacer”.
Sacred is not be understood in the sense of a power
possessed by a being or an object. But as a quality that
“men” attribute to beings or objects. Sacer was not a
“magic force” but a juridical quality defined by property.
Divine property, like public or private property, was
considered inviolable. Any violation, especially in regards
to divine property was met with the gods’ wrath and their
awful vengeance. Hence, the meaning of sacrilege was defined
as the infringement of the gods’ property.
The Roman definition of
legal boundaries is termini [2].
The square shaped fields were surrounded by a narrow buffer
area of uncultivated land which was sacred, or the property
of the gods, and could not be owned by mortals. The
sacredness of these boundaries were regularly renewed
through sacrifice and rituals that legitimized the
re-marking of the termini. The boundaries separated
and cushioned the sacred land belonging to the gods from the
profane fields owned by individuals. As such the gods were
benevolent guardians of their property as well as the
mortals’. It might be inferred that the gods were guarantors
of the inviolability and legality of property rights.
The opposite of sacer
was profanus. Any sacred object that was ritually
removed from the realm of the gods and move to the sphere of
the mortals was profane. Profanare meant “to bring
out” the offering from where the sacrifice was performed.
And profanum meant what was “in front of the temple
precinct”. The temple being a location set apart by a
wall and surrounded by a space available for profane use –profanus.
Sacrifice was at the
center of Roman religious activity. It consist of a
sacrificial killing where the offering was separated from
the profane use by “making it sacred”. In most cases the
immolated animal was a bovine, a sheep or a pig. The
entrails were consecrated –the process of making something
sacred– to the gods and were burned on an altar. The rest of
the meat was then “rendered profane” simply by “seizing” it.
Laying the hand on the sacrificial offering made it suitable
for consumption. Throughout the celebration the participants
would remind the gods of their function and ask for favors.
Prayers were also part of a ritual sacrifice and in a public
celebration they would always contain the words “for the
Roman people”.
These sacrifices were
made during major religious festivals. They were offered by
male leaders in their respective jurisdiction and community.
Magistrates –or their delegates– could perform public
rituals. Every father performed their domestic sacrifice.
There were no basic differences between public and private
celebration of the ritual sacrifice. The only general
guiding principle of sacrificial banquets was the respect of
privilege, rank and status. The sacrificial banquet was the
solemn occasion for mortals to consult with their divine
partners and deal with the more pressing business matters of
the day.
Although there were many
priestly orders, priests were not in charge of performing
all major rituals. Rituals were celebrated by rulers,
magistrates and the heads of families. Each celebrant had
its own jurisdiction. They represented respectively public,
community, institutional and family rituals. All male
officials that held authority in public life were also
responsible for the cult of the institution or the community
that they led. Every father acted as a priest in the
performance of the cult of his domestic family. And it could
be said that the family constituted the basis of Roman
religio.
The city of Rome was the
center from which the elite ruled over all civic powers. The
gods worked in conjunction with the rulers for the benefit
of all citizens. At its core rested the old ruling class and
their families –the patricians. The power flowed from the
top to the magistrates –the elected officials. The next
level of social stratus were the equestrians and
plebeians. Followed by ordinary citizens who did not
partake in the politics of Rome. Subjugated to the rulers
were the free non-citizens and the slaves. Whereas, for
those who came to Rome voluntarily, they lacked any formal
status.
At the height of its
power Rome’s population reached almost a million people. To
put this figure in perspective, London’s population
surpassed that number in 1801, and Paris’ in 1846. The
empire included most of Europe, the middle-east and north
Africa. The population of Rome was highly diverse
ethnically, culturally and religiously. Indro Montanelli
explains in History of Rome that its inhabitants,
unlike the more sophisticated Greeks, were not avid fans of
drama or theater [3].
The population was too diverse linguistically, with a
majority speaking little or no Latin. The people preferred
spectacles of vulgar pantomime and variety shows such as the
popular Circus Maximus held at the Coliseum.
Among the legacies left
behind by the Romans are bridges, roads, aqueducts, temples,
stadiums, sewer systems, running water, heating systems,
public baths, etc. Some of the original fountains built by
the Romans are still running today. The empire had over
100,000 km (60,000 miles) of roads that were widely used
giving birth to the saying: Every road leads to Rome.
To this day these feats of engineering show the extent of
the visible contribution left by the Roman Empire.
Montanelli explains that
Rome used a highly developed form of capitalism even tough
it had no great industry of its own. And except for a few
small businesses, the city thrived on commerce and
speculation. The bulk of the economy was derived from its
politics. Wealthy citizens spent a great deal of money to
build their political career and once in power found ways to
get richer at the expense of the provinces and colonies.
The economy was based on
a disciplined and controlled monetary system linked to
coins, mostly precious metals. The state could not and would
not print money to pay for their expenditures. The empire
survived and expanded by collecting taxes from its colonies.
Romans were well aware of what inflationary risks could do
to the economy.
Tiberius found out that
deflation could be as devastating as inflation. To remedy a
depression that took hold during his reign he disbursed the
equivalence of billions of Imperial Coins to the banks and
ordered them to lend the money free of interest for five
years. The scheme turned out to be successful and shows the
level of efficiency attained by its capitalist
system.
One of the main aspect
that made the rise of the Roman Empire possible, was the
involvement of its rulers in battle during the conquest and
enlargement of the Empire. The most strategic
and resourceful locations were ruled by a governor defended
by centurions, paid for by taxes collected from the occupied
people. History reveals that the economic survival of an
empire rests on the ability to tax its colonies.
Romans conquered and
expanded their empire not because they were physically
stronger than their enemies but because they believed that
Rome was founded by the gods. The citizens were indebted to
the gods since birth with a tacit obligation to sacrifice
their lives for the greatness of Rome. This was reinforced
by the solemn act of sacratio where a commander
consecrated his life by given it exclusivity to the gods in
order to insure victory.
The Romans applied a
great deal of ruthlessness when it came to the destruction,
carnage and pillage of their conquests. The ruling
conquerors were always first to benefit from the fruits of
their invasion. Yet they were dutiful in paying their fair
share of taxes to the state that was proportionate to their
wealth. They dedicated ten years of their lives to military
service. And only men who completed their military duty
could enter politics. When it came time to choose between
their own personal interests and those of the state, its
citizens always put the interest of Rome first.
Prior to the publication
of the Laws of the Twelve Tables (462-450 BC), Rome was
essentially a theocracy in which the king was also the pope.
He was the sole medium between the divine and the mortals
with the power to interpret the will of the gods
in private religious ceremonies. The king also had the
authority to decide and settle civil legal matters. The
advent of the Twelve Tables resulted in the separation
between civil law and religious law. It shifted the power
away from the strict control of the priesthood and relegated
it into an institution subservient to the state, a function
without any political power. This separation between the
civil and religious code of law became the backbone of the
Republic.
The publication of the
Laws of the Twelve Tables was considered so important that
it was taught to all Roman children who knew it by
heart. The reading, interpretation and the juridical
application of rituals to the gods became the basis of Roman
religio.
Religious festivals or
feriae –holiday– were originally based on two
calendars. The natural, or agrarian calendar, was based on
the rising or setting of the zodiac signs revealing heavenly
signs that ruled plant cycles and agriculture. The other was
described as the civic calendar, the calendar of magistrates
and citizens. The latter was improved and adopted under the
rule of Julius Cesar. It was appropriately called the
Julian or Caesarean calendar and is still in use
today. The calendar set the division between the days
dedicated for the gods and the days that allowed the profane
activity of the citizens. Days designated for the gods were
called nefasti. On those days the activities of
mortals were not allowed in public places. Days that were
fasti were open for human activity.
American Civil
Religion
The transition between
Rome and the United States of America is made easy by the
numerous Roman legacies that have been adopted by the United
States and its capital. The Capitol is a reference to Rome’s
Capitoline Hill, the site of the Capitol temple dedicated to
the Capitoline triad: Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. The
Greek-Roman architecture adorned by many government
buildings are a visible sign of that legacy. The use of the
Julian calendar, with many names of days and months
dedicated to the gods of Rome, is another mark of this
heritage. The Roman alphabet and the use of the Law is a
continuing tribute to the Law of the Twelve Tables and
jurisprudence –Justinian.
Inaugural speeches reveal the ongoing essence
of American civil religion. They are meant to establish an
ideological consensus among a population with diverse
ethnical backgrounds and religious traditions. To unify a
nation politically while consecrating the authority of the
state and its rulers. We have seen how Roman civil religion
played a similar role in respect to the establishment of
order, the rule of law and civic harmony. American civil
religion is not a theological discourse meant to reinforce a
theocratic rule, but a civic creed whose function is to
integrate and harmonize diverse conflicting religious
beliefs of society. As Robert N. Bellah explains in
Civil Religion in America:
“The words and acts of the founding fathers,
especially the first few presidents, shaped the form and
tone of the civil religion as it has been maintained ever
since. Though much is selectively derived from Christianity,
this religion is clearly not itself Christianity. For one
thing, neither Washington nor Adams nor Jefferson mentions
Christ in his inaugural address; nor do any of the
subsequent presidents, although not one of them fails to
mention God. The God of the civil
religion is not only rather "unitarian," he is also on the
austere side, much more related to order, law, and right
than to salvation and love. Even though he is somewhat deist
in cast, he is by no means simply a watchmaker God. He is
actively interested and involved in history, with a special
concern for America. Here the analogy has much less to do
with natural law than with ancient Israel; the equation of
America with Israel in the idea of the "American Israel" is
not infrequent. What was implicit in
the words of Washington already quoted becomes explicit in
Jefferson's second inaugural when he said: "I shall need,
too, the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led
our fathers, as Israel of old, from their native land and
planted them in a country flowing with all the necessaries
and comforts of life." Europe is Egypt; America, the
promised land. God has led his people to establish a new
sort of social order that shall be a light unto all the
nations. This theme, too, has been a continuous one in the
civil religion. We have already alluded to it in the case of
the Kennedy inaugural. We find it again in President
Johnson's inaugural address…”
As such the oath of
office is eminently ceremonial:
“This public religious
dimension is expressed in a set of beliefs, symbols, and
rituals that I am calling American civil religion. The
inauguration of a president is an important ceremonial event
in this religion. It reaffirms, among other things, the
religious legitimation of the highest political authority.”
George Washington’s first inaugural address
April 30, 1789;
“That Almighty Being who rules over the
universe, who presides in the councils of nations, and whose
providential aids can supply every defect…
The preservation of the sacred fire of
liberty and the destiny of the republican model of
government are justly considered, perhaps, as deeply, as
finally, staked on the experiment intrusted to the hands of
the American people.”
Thanksgiving is a
compelling example of American civil religion’s ritual. A
legal holiday, where the activities of the mortals cease in
order to make room to celebrate and share a meal at home
with family and friends. On that day it is traditional to
invite a stranger or persons who are less fortunate to join
in the union. Although it is considered a “secular” holiday
with no references to religious doctrine or dogma, it is
nonetheless a civic communion. It is a time to give thanks
and express gratitude for the security, social benefits and
the material comfort one has. The thanksgiving is
nonetheless implicitly directed to an invisible power as the
benefactor of these benefits.
“Just as Thanksgiving
Day, which incidentally was securely institutionalized as an
annual national holiday only under the presidency of
Lincoln, serves to integrate the family into the civil
religion, so Memorial Day has acted to integrate the local
community into the national cult. Together with the less
overtly religious Fourth of July and the more minor
celebrations of Veterans Day and the birthdays of Washington
and Lincoln, these two holidays provide an annual ritual
calendar for the civil religion. The public school system
serves as a particularly important context for the cultic
celebration of the civil rituals.”
The Speeches
The inaugural speeches
we are about to examine were delivered in January. The name
of the month is derived from word Janus, the Roman
god of doors, passage ways and beginnings. Unlike most of
the gods of the pantheon, Janus was an original Roman deity.
Janus embodied the rite of passage. He was the god endowed
with the privilege of being invoked first in ceremonies.
Janus was made famous for being depicted on coins with two
faces and in sculptures with two heads, representing the
opening and closing, the past and the future. A sanctuary
with an altar was provided in his honor in the old Forum.
And according to whether the doors were open or closed
indicated the state of peace or war –Livy.
President George W. Bush's Inaugural Address,
January 20, 2001
“Through
much of the last century,
America's
faith in freedom
and democracy was a rock in a raging sea. Now it is a
seed upon the wind, taking root in many nations…
Our democratic faith
is more than the creed of our country, it is
the inborn hope of our humanity, an ideal we carry but do
not own, a trust we bear and pass along. And even after
nearly 225 years, we have a long way yet to travel…”
The quotes above represent
tenets of American civil religion as defined by Robert N.
Bellah with the notable exceptions of the following
reference:
“I know this is in our
reach because we are guided by a power larger than
ourselves who creates us equal in His image…”
The attribute “a power” is
a substitute to the appellation God. The phrase reveals an
allusion to the creation narrative of Genesis I and II. In
Genesis God creates man in is His image, whereas the
President describes it as “a power” who creates “us equal”
to “His image”. The word “equal” might be attributed to the
reference in the Declaration of Independence where “all men
are created equal”.
A Bible search revealed
no match to “a power larger than ourselves”. Typically the
word “power” is used as an attribute of God as in; the power
of God, the power of Jesus Christ, the power of the Holy
Spirit, etc. In reference to God, the attribute “greater” is
usually used instead of “larger”. Etymologically, the word
“power” has a legal and political connotation. As for the
word “ourselves”, it implies “self” as a “person”.
In the later days of the
Roman Republic the word “corporation” was used in documents
in the same sense as collegium. The term referred to
a form of legal association consisting of at least three
persons. The collegium was also described as having a
“body” –corpus habere. The corporation possessed the
legal right of holding property in common. It shared a
treasury and could sue or be sued. The property of the
corporation was liable to be seized and sold for its debts.
According to Roman law, what was due to the collegium
was not owed to the individuals composing it. And what was
an indebtedness of the collegium was not the debt of
the individuals.
The Roman concept of
“corporation” was adapted by the early Christian
ecclesiae –churches– as a legal form of protection in
periods of persecution. It was mostly used as a legal means
of holding and transferring the churches’ property.
Corporations were later adopted by varied religious monastic
orders. In the Middle Ages life was largely “corporate”, in
the sense that religion was defined by “corporations” of
monks and friars. It was considered a secure way of
protecting ecclesiastical property especially in times of
feudal warfare.
These corporations in
the course of history survived and prospered. The concept
was improved with the introduction of “corporation sole”
defined by English law. Where a “sole” or single religious
office holder could transfer the same position with
identical powers to his successor.
In the US the
corporation is an association defined by civil law as an
“individual” or “artificial being”. Chief Justice Marshall of the
Supreme Court describes the
corporation as follows:
“A corporation is an artificial being,
invisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of
law. Being the mere creature of law, it possesses only those
properties which the charter of its creation confers upon
it, either expressly or as incidental to its very existence.
These are such as are supposed best calculated to effect the
object for which it was created. Among the most important
are immortality, and, if the expression may be allowed,
individuality; properties by which a perpetual succession of
many persons are considered as the same, and may act as a
single individual. They enable a corporation to manage its
own affairs, and to hold property without the perplexing
intricacies, the hazardous and endless necessity of
perpetual conveyances for the purpose of transmitting it
from hand to hand. It is chiefly for the purpose of clothing
bodies of men, in succession, with qualities and capacities,
that corporations were invented, and are in use. By these
means, a perpetual succession of individuals are capable of
acting for the promotion of the particular object, like one
immortal being.”
Based on the above
definition, this “individual” is invisible, intangible and
immortal. As such it exceeds normal human powers and is
construed to be supernatural. This “artificial being” is
“larger” than its constituent parts, with “a power larger”
than the individuals comprising it. The “corporation” as we
know it today surpass in power and wealth any human person
on this planet. Although it was originally created by a
human being it has become so powerful that it can create a
world in its own image.
And some needs and hurts
are so deep they will only respond to a mentor's touch or a
pastor's prayer. Church and charity, synagogue and
mosque lend our communities their humanity, and they
will have an honored place in our plans and in our laws…
As Jonathan Z. Smith noted,
the President’s use of words and their sequence of “Church
and charity, synagogue and mosque” relates to the “Abrahamic
tradition”, one that “maps Christianity at the center,
Judaism the near neighbor, and Islam the far.” [4]. Most notable is
the absence of the inclusion of “world” faiths and varied
religious beliefs and movements.
Sometimes in life we are
called to do great things. But as a saint of our
times has said, every day we are called to do small things
with great love. The most important tasks of a democracy are
done by everyone…
The words of the
undisclosed “saint” can be traced to Mother Teresa. Although
the Vatican began a process of beatification, Mother Teresa
is not canonized yet. The use of the word “saint” with a
lower case is in all likelihood meant as an attribute. The
spelling with a capital letter is typically reserved for
canonized Saints. In passing, Mother Teresa was known to be
a staunch Roman Catholic with an uncompromising position on
abortion who faithfully submitted to the teaching of the
Catholic Church. As such the quote can be seen as implicitly
placing the Catholic Church at center of the “Abrahamic
tradition”.
“After the Declaration of
Independence was signed, Virginia statesman John Page wrote
to Thomas Jefferson: ``We know the race is not to the swift
nor the battle to the strong. Do you not think an angel
rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm?''
This work continues. This
story goes on. And an angel still rides in the
whirlwind and directs this storm.
God
bless you all, and God bless America.”
The
reference to “saint”, “angel” and “God” are considered to be
in line with examples of American civil religion stated
previously.
President Sworn-In to Second Term,
January 20, 2005
“America's vital
interests and our deepest beliefs are now one. From the day
of our Founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman
on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value,
because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven
and earth.”
The quote above is a reference to the
Nicene Creed, 381 AD: “I believe in one God, the Father
Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth…”. Most of the Christian
denominations adhere to the creed with the notable
exceptions of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints, the Church of the New Jerusalem, and Jehovah’s
Witnesses. One can infer by the reference that Christianity
is again placed as a central premise of the “Abrahamic
tradition”.
“In America's ideal of
freedom, the public interest depends on private character -
on integrity, and tolerance toward others, and the rule of
conscience in our own lives. Self-government relies, in the
end, on the governing of the self. That edifice of character
is built in families, supported by communities with
standards, and sustained in our national life by the
truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the
Koran, and the varied faiths of our people…”
What exactly is meant by
“truths of
Sinai” is left to conjecture and open to interpretation.
The Egyptian Sinai Peninsula is a vast desert area between
the Gulf of Suez and
Israel. The most obvious relation to Sinai would be Moses
where he roamed for 40 years with the chosen people of God
in search of the promise land. Mount Sinai is where he
received the Ten Commandments from Yahweh. Moses died before
he reached his destination. It was Joshua who was called to
lead the people to its promised destination.
The relation to the
Sermon on the Mount, contrary to the fuzzy “truths” of
the Sinai, points to a precise location, era, subject matter
made by Jesus Christ. Again Jesus Christ is mapped at the
center of the religious discourse with the vagueness of the
Sinai of Judaism as its near neighbor.
The other religious
reference is to the sacred book the Koran, and by extension
to the prophet Mohammed, also placed at the limits of the
Abrahamic tradition.
The list ends with a
description of “the varied faiths of our people” more inline
with typical tenets of American civil religion.
“The rulers of outlaw regimes can know
that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: "Those who
deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and,
under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it."
We go forward with complete confidence in
the eventual triumph of freedom. Not because history runs on
the wheels of inevitability; it is human choices that move
events. Not because we consider ourselves a chosen
nation; God moves and chooses as He wills. We have
confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind,
the hunger in dark places, the longing of the soul. When our
Founders declared a new order of the ages; when soldiers
died in wave upon wave for a union based on liberty; when
citizens marched in peaceful outrage under the banner
"Freedom Now" - they were acting on an ancient hope that is
meant to be fulfilled. History has an ebb and flow of
justice, but history also has a visible direction, set by
liberty and the Author of Liberty…
May God bless you, and may He
watch over the United States of America.”
The excerpt above
implies an analogy between “a chosen nation” and the “chosen
people” of Israel. The juxtaposition “nation” with “people”
is not an uncommon connection to American civil religion as
described by Bellah.
Conclusion
Roman civil religion
consisted in the knowledge that the gods were benevolent
partners of the mortals in the management of the world for
the benefit of all citizens. It was based on the liberty to
establish beneficial relations with the gods founded on
reason rather than fear. The gods were benevolent guarantor
of law and order for he sake of Rome’s stability and growth.
Religio’s function consisted in integrating and
harmonizing the varied and conflicting cultures and faiths
living in Rome and throughout the empire. Although Rome’s
civil religion was polytheistic, its religious system was
essentially monolithic, in the sense that everything
gravitated around Rome as the center of power and its
citizens.
The President’s references to Mother Teresa, The
Nicene Creed and the Sermon on the Mount, is placing
Christianity at the center of the “Abrahamic tradition”. By
doing so he is attempting to establish a precedent in
respect to American civil religion. These specific comments
have no historic antecedent and are a break from American
civil religious’ tenets. As Bellah points out, not even John
F. Kennedy who was Catholic, made any references to Jesus
Christ or the Catholic Church. He limited himself to
reference to God as the deity of an American civil creed.
One that embraces inclusiveness rather than exceptionalism.
[1] Giorgio Agamben,
Profanations, New York, Zone Books, 2007, p. 75.
[2] Jonathan Z. Smith,
Relating Religion, Chicago, University of Chicago Press,
2004, p. 105.
[3]
Indro Montanelli, Histoire de Rome, Paris, Editions
Mondiales, 1959.
[4] Jonathan Z. Smith,
Ibid. p. 381.
| 
