Previous | Next 

CURRENTLY IN CULTURE
Grasping at symbols

R. Jonathan Moore

In Kentucky, a battle continues over posting the Ten Commandments on courthouse walls. Last year, a judge ordered Pulaski and McCreary Counties to remove their religious plaques. But they soon reposted the commandments, this time surrounded by the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and other documents. Naturally, this clever attempt to make the display into a more neutral, merely historical one didn’t satisfy the American Civil Liberties Union. Litigation continues.

In Lexington, Mass., the local Knights of Columbus (a Roman Catholic service club) is trying to maintain a decades-old tradition by putting a nativity scene in the public square. Last Christmas, however, they were stopped by a recently adopted local ordinance banning such displays. Residents who in the past had complained about the nativity scene decided to request permission to decorate the green with displays honouring other religions – including a temple to the Egyptian sun god Ra and a Hindu-related herd of cows. Rejecting these requests while continuing to allow the nativity scene, city council members knew, would be discriminatory. So, early last year, public officials passed an ordinance banning all such displays from Lexington’s square. The Knights have charged that this statute violates their right to free (religious) speech. The city won this argument in federal district court, but the Knights may appeal.

In both cases, those seeking to put religious symbols on public property are pursuing a cause which, if successful, would fail to yield any practical benefits. Placing the Ten Commandments in public buildings won’t make Kentuckians more moral, any more than the presence of a nativity scene in Lexington’s most public space will spark a religious revival.

In both cases, the contests are really over symbols. Losing state sponsorship of religious symbols can be painful, for it ratifies a change in North American society that many Christians are unwilling to accept. Having Christian symbols in the courthouse or town square signifies that Christianity rests at the heart of civic society. Once the state denies the public display of Christian symbols, Christians may be forced to recognize that North America’s religious character is no longer predominantly Christian.

Fighting for state sponsorship for religious symbols highlights the desperation of a cause in decline. Voices insisting on the Christian nature of America have become more shrill as that description has become less accurate. Christians would do well to remember this when contemplating the introduction (or reintroduction) of symbols of faith into civic spaces. In an ever more pluralistic society, such actions not only create hostility in fellow citizens who believe differently, but they signal a willful unwillingness to face reality.

This is not to say that Christians should merely accept reality as they find it. Indeed, they serve the common good by helping their fellow citizens imagine a better world. But attempting to recreate a bygone era by insisting that the state publicly recognize Christian symbols prevents an honest discussion of any potential future. Clearing away the symbolic clutter from government-owned public spaces might make room for more creative and spiritually wise ways for Christians to present their faith to the wider society.

This article was distributed as a Sightings column from the Martin Marty Center at the University of Chicago Divinity School. R. Jonathan Moore is managing editor of Sightings and a doctoral student at the University of Chicago Divinity School.

Previous | Next 

Last modified April 26, 2001.

© 2001 Mennonite Brethren Herald.
Published by the Canadian Conference of MB Churches.
Masthead and usage information.