Atheists' Fears Create Controversy Over WTC Cross

Toogood Reports ^ | June 19, 2002 | Mary Mostert

[Stand Watch Listen]

A controversy has erupted over a proposal to use a large steel cross found in the rubble of the World Trade Center in a memorial to victims of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Construction worker Frank Silecchia found the cross two days after the collapse of the twin towers. The cross was from World Trade tower One, and was found in World Trade building Six. The only complete story I´ve located about the cross, written at the time it was found, comes from Bible Network News in an (October 10, 2001 article.

"Silecchia, a Christian, found several crosses standing upright in the smoldering wreckage three days after the attack. They were crossbeams that had fallen from the top of the collapsing north tower and landed in an unusual position.

"Believing them to be a sign from G-d, Silecchia dubbed the area ‘G-d's House,´ and led distraught rescue workers there to pray. Word spread as priests and pastors ministering on the site encountered the structures, and told others how startling they appeared." Silecchia led a Franciscan friar, Father Brian Jordan, to the site a couple of weeks later.

"It was astounding," Jordan said. "When he showed it to me, I was an instant believer."

"Silecchia told the priest that the crosses should be saved for a permanent memorial. Jordan agreed, and contacted Deputy Mayor Joseph Lhota to make arrangements.

"The most significant of the crosses was removed from the wreckage, affixed by ironworkers to a permanent base, then placed on the high walkway over West Street."

In early October, according to Bible News Network, "…300 people gathered there for prayer and reflection.

"Firefighters came. Police officers came. Construction workers, rescue personnel, Port Authority officers and others - all gathered at the foot of the 20-foot-tall cross to watch Father Brian Jordan, a Franciscan friar, bless the cross and pray for ‘the healing mercy of G-d on all Americans."

"‘Behold the glory of the cross at ground zero,'' Jordan said. ‘This is our symbol of hope, our symbol of faith, our symbol of healing.´. The workers prayed and sang G-d Bless America together before returning to work.

"A teary-eyed firefighter said the cross helped him overcome his anger. ‘We thought the devil was here, but with this cross, we know G-d is here,´ the firefighter said. Sadly, in spite of reading news reports hours every day, I did not hear about the cross until Atheists objected to it being on public property. This story is an example of the "politically correct" editorial slant of the daily news as reported by America´s multi-national media outlets.

Why wasn´t this very unusual story a major media event, especially in view of the comfort it gave the men digging through the rubble for dead bodies during those horrible days following 9-11? According to Ellen Johnson, president of American Atheists, using the cross Silecchia found which brought comfort to so many of the workers toiling in the horrible mess day- in-and-day-out as part of the permanent memorial "would violate the separation of church and state, be insensitive to those victims who had no religious beliefs and would incredibly pay homage to religion - the prime motivating factor in the faith-based attack of Sept. 11. ….This is an inappropriate use of taxpayer money. You can't take government funds to promote religion, especially sectarian religion in the form of a 'cross' or any other religious symbol."

Ellen Johnson´s comment took me back to my own 29 years as an agnostic Humanist when I discussed issues with many atheists. It always puzzled me that they exhibited such genuine fear of crosses, while at the same time claiming they were SURE there is no G-d. I remember standing by a table decoration composed of a small New England church replica at a party talking to an atheist about my own age. The party was in the basement of a Unitarian Church in Memphis, Tennessee.

As we talked, he reached over and snapped off the cross on the top of the display and threw it in the trash. I was dumbfounded that he would mutilate property that didn´t belong to him, and scolded him for his vandalism. However, he said he simply "could not stand to be in the same room with that cross."

Ellen Johnson´s fears have led her to take the issue to court on the grounds that allowing the steel beam cross, the only remnant of the World Trade Center still on the site, to remain would "be an insult" to people who don´t believe in G-d "and indeed anyone else who isn't a Christian." Those steel beams in the form of a cross are the most appropriate and least costly memorial possible. Whatever one´s beliefs, the facts are the cross was created by the attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 and discovered by a humble laborer. It has been a source of comfort to hundreds, if not thousands, of people who have worked at or visited the site every since the attack. It would create a meaningful memorial if only to remind us of the months of backbreaking and emotionally intense labor of people like Frank Silecchia.

I suggest, if that frightens the atheists, they can just stay away from the memorial. The rest of us won´t miss them at all.

[Stand Watch Listen]

[Black Agnes]

ping!

[McGavin999]

That picture with the angels still has an overwhelming effect on me.

I hope this case is thrown out of court. I'm sick of athiests forcing their religion on me.

[TrappedInLiberalHell]

be insensitive to those victims who had no religious beliefs

I have no religious beliefs, and I wouldn't have a problem with this memorial. Rabid Atheists are the rotten apples that spoil the barrel of quiet, live-and-let-live agnostics like me. The same way the so-called 'radical right' tarnishes the image of the Republican Party.

[rudypoot]

"...would violate the separation of church and state, be insensitive to those victims who had no religious beliefs..."

And how about being sensitive to those victim who were christians? It's called freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. Why do Christians always seem to get the short end of the stick with this stuff?

[Valin]

According to Ellen Johnson, president of American Atheists, using the cross Silecchia found which brought comfort to so many of the workers toiling in the horrible mess day- in-and-day-out as part of the permanent memorial "would violate the separation of church and state, be insensitive to those victims who had no religious beliefs and would incredibly pay homage to religion - the prime motivating factor in the faith-based attack of Sept. 11. ….This is an inappropriate use of taxpayer money. You can't take government funds to promote religion, especially sectarian religion in the form of a 'cross' or any other religious symbol."

GIVE
ME
A
BREAK!

[agenda_express]

It's called freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion.

Amen. Plus, it's unconstitutional - but don't let rational thought get in the way of liberal propoganda.

[Aquinasfan]

That Cross is a perfect memorial.

[jlogajan]

I'm an atheist. I believe the WTC properties are privately owned or quasi-privately owned. Seems to be no problem.

[doc30]

And if the cross IS on public propery, sell the 10' by 10' property its on to a private group who will maintain it. Hence no more "cross on Public Property" issue.

[jlogajan]

I don't even mind if they rent it. As long as all other religions or lack have an equal opportunity to rent similar facilities.

[Anamensis]

Same here. I'm an atheist but in the months following 911 I came to the conclusion that I knew who was on "my" side and who wasn't. Christians, Israeli Jews, and those of us who have no faith but love this country are the only ones ready to stand against the Muslims, and the communists and socialists who have embraced their cause. And there are now only two types of people in the world who count, to me. Those who are with us and those who are against us. If those with us want to fight and pray under a cross, let 'em.

[NYC GOP Chick]

I am a not particularly religious Jew who has seen the cross in person and am somewhat awed and amazed by it. I have no problem with it remaining there if it gives comfort and solace to others. As someone who witnessed the attacks live, wound up running for my life when the south tower collapsed and still lives in the area, I support those who want to keep it there.

I have a couple of photos of it on the last page (I think) of this site: http://wtcaftermath.tripod.com/

[wingnuts'nbolts]

We should all be worried and pander to the athiests in this country, NOT. They and their feelings are a nonissue. If is offends ignore. We have been ignoring them for years.

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

According to Ellen Johnson, president of American Atheists, using the cross Silecchia found which brought comfort to so many of the workers toiling in the horrible mess day- in-and-day-out as part of the permanent memorial "would violate the separation of church and state, be insensitive to those victims who had no religious beliefs and would incredibly pay homage to religion - the prime motivating factor in the faith-based attack of Sept. 11. ….

These people need to develop some hobbies.

[coydog]

If they were intellectually honest atheists/agnostics, no religious symbol, on public land or not, would give them any offense at all because such symbols would by default be meaningless to them. This has nothing to do with freedom of religion and everything to do with making everyone else dance to their tune. It's a power game.

[JulieRNR21]

I had hoped that that magnificent Cross would be part of a permanent memorial; but I also felt that the athiests, ACLU & PC wackos would try to prevent it.

This Cross is an important part of the history of what happened that horrific day. It has brought comfort to the families and those who have worked at Ground Hero for many months.....just as the PC tried to stage a 'diversity' flag raising statue; they now want to prevent this cross from being part of the memorial....we must all fight for this Cross!

[gov_bean_ counter]

Just once, I would like to hear a talking head ask the likes of Ms Johnson the location of the Church of the United States where the President of the United States is head of the church. When they are not be able to name one they should be told to come back when they find one. At that point the establishment clause can be discussed in its appropirate context.