Posted on 04/03/2003 6:25:58 PM PST by honway
A Maryland minister was barred from giving the opening prayer in the state Senate after he refused to drop a reference to Jesus.
The Rev. David N. Hughes of the Trinity and Evangelical Church of Adamstown, Md., intended to round out his invocation yesterday with the line, "In Jesus' name, Amen." But the sergeant at arms – on the orders of Senate President Thomas Mike Miller Jr. – shut the reverend out of the body's chambers.
Miller issued the orders after two Jewish lawmakers threatened to stage a boycott of the legislative session if the phrase was not removed.
"I'm shocked by the response. I've never had this happen in 26 years," Hughes told the Frederick News-Post. "It just makes me feel that they've taken away my right as an American to pray, and this is the seat of government, and that's scary."
The pastor – a Vietnam veteran – was invited to give the prayer by Republican Sen. Alex Mooney. Hughes was Mooney's fourth guest. The other three were Jewish rabbis.
Opening up legislative sessions with prayer is a longstanding tradition in Maryland, as it is in states across the country. Mooney told WorldNetDaily no one had been barred from giving an invocation before. He sees irony in yesterday's "censorship."
Maryland state Republican Rep. Alex Mooney
"We were the first state to address religious tolerance in our state charter," he told WorldNetDaily. "This just shows a lack of tolerance for peoples' religious views."
Mooney recalled numerous instances of invocations referencing Jesus throughout the four years that he has been in office.
But at the beginning of the session this year, a string of invocations by Baptist preachers invoking the name Jesus Christ sparked debate on the issue. Miller appealed to lawmakers for tolerance and urged they stick to guidelines that call for invocations to be of an ecumenical nature and respectful of all faiths.
Webster's New World Dictionary defines ecumenical as "promoting cooperation or better understanding among differing religious faiths."
Since the debate, the Senate clerk screens prayers ahead of time and flagged the written text submitted by Hughes.
When Sens. Ida Ruben and Gloria Hollinger – both of whom are Jewish – heard of the reference, they asked Mooney to strike it.
"I said, 'Hey, I'll let him pray however he wants to pray. I'm not going to censor him and tell him how he needs to pray,'" Mooney told WND.
Ruben told the Frederick News-Post she then urged Hughes to substitute "messiah" for Jesus, telling him the reference could offend non-Christians and goes against the guidelines.
Neither Ruben nor Miller returned calls seeking comment.
"This is part of my faith," Hughes responded, according to Mooney. "The Gospel says when you pray, pray in Jesus' name."
The senators next asked to be excused from the floor during the prayer.
Paradoxically, a walk-out over a Muslim cleric's prayer opening a Washington state legislative session last month backfired on one Christian lawmaker.
Washington state Republican Rep. Lois McMahan
As WorldNetDaily reported, Rep. Lois McMahan, a Republican from Gig Harbor, Wash., refused to participate in the prayer and declared, "My god is not Muhammed."
"The Islamic religion is so ... part and parcel with the attack on America. I just didn't want to be there, be a part of that," she said in an interview with the Seattle Post Intelligencer. "Even though the mainstream Islamic religion doesn't profess to hate America, nonetheless it spawns the groups that hate America."
But a day later, McMahan apologized on the floor of the state House of Representatives amid mounting furor over her stance.
Debate over invocations is raging elsewhere in the country. As WorldNetDaily reported, several Southern California cities are grappling with threats from both sides of the issue.
Under pressure from the American Civil Liberties Union to quit using the name Jesus Christ in invocations, the city of Lake Elsinore, in Riverside County, decided to eliminate mention of "religious figures." The decree subsequently had the apparent effect of eliminating the prayer altogether, as no local pastors would accept invitations to deliver the prayer, and city councilors adopted moments of silence instead.
The ACLU contends that praying at the request of a government entity is a violation of the First Amendment's prohibition against the establishment of religion.
But the nonprofit United States Justice Foundation, which threatened to sue the city if it failed to reverse its decision, maintains telling a pastor what to pray is a violation of his First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and religion.
The notion of "separation of church and state" is derived from the dissenting opinion of the 1946 Supreme Court case Everson vs. Board of Education, which upheld a program allowing parents to be repaid from state funds for the costs of transportation to private religious schools. The court required only that the state maintain neutrality in its relations with various groups of religious believers.
"The decision in Everson does not rise to the level of being a battle cry for those who would wish to remove every vestige of religion from the public forum," USJF litigation counsel Richard Ackerman asserts.
"There's a push in this country to remove religion from society," Mooney echoed, "from the Supreme Court's decision on the Pledge to the ACLU going after all the Ten Commandments posted across the country. ... Nothing in the church-state relationship allows censorship and the removal of religious values from society."
Rabbi Morris Kosman of the Beth Sholom Congregation in Frederick said prayer at any level is more important than no prayer at all.
"My own personal feelings, not to be taken as defined Judaic stand, is that if I'm not included in a prayer that specifically denotes Christianity or any other particular sect, I don't mind," Kosman said. "I'm a minority. I'd feel more uncomfortable having 300 persons recite a non-denominational prayer for my sake. I can say my own prayer. I certainly vote for the recital of prayer at any level, whether it includes me or not. I say pray, whatever the prayer is."
What would Scooby Do?
Is it ok to point out silly superstitions that have no basis in the Word?
Consider this:
And you shall not profane my holy name, but I will be hallowed among the people of Israel (Leviticus 22:32)
you shall tear down their altars, and dash in pieces their pillars, and burn their Ashe'rim with fire; you shall hew down the graven images of their gods, and destroy their name out of that place.
You shall not do so to the LORD your God. (Deuteronomy 12:3-4)
I recall that the Smithsonian Magazine article w/ the picture of the bible in it said what I stated before. Perhaps the article writer was unaware of this.
I'll remember that the next time you start flaming people who fly the Southern Cross.
Secondly, I thank you for being the first person on this thread who said exactly the same thing as I.
There so many facets to the issue. You are right, no one has the right to ask someone to change his prayers. This is what most people on this thread think has happened: a bunch of Leftists, orignally from Jewish families, are asking a Christian not to be one. If this were the case, I would be offended, too --- for all my Christian friends and my Christian fellow citizens.
BUt this is not the case: there is a difference between a (i) private prayer or prayer within the congregation, (ii) a prayer in a mixed company, and (iii) leading mixed company in prayer. Not every good person can be a leader. If someone, as these senators did, question the ability of the minister to LEAD a mixed group in prayer, this is not an affront on his person of his beliefs.
Unfortunately, many see this as a Jewish-Christian issue. It is not. There are differences between Catholics and Protestants, and other denominations. If I were a Christian of any denomination and led purely Christian but mixed congregation in prayer, I would still be concerned in finding common ground rather than emphasizing the differences. To me, this is a question of tact and not theology.
THere is, of course, another aspect of it: GIVEN that this happened, what would be my reaction to it? I personally (I Am Jewish)would note but have no problem at all letting the prayer stand as stated. I have said many times on this forum and on this thread in particular, that I would like to see thins nation returning to its Christian roots. I Would like to see more prayer, and I think (true) Jews and Christians have a common opponent --- atheistic socialism. I personally would be willing to overlook the theological differences among --- and urge my Protestant and Catholic friends to do the same --- for the sake of unity. And not just as a "tactical" device: ideally, I would like us all respect our differences. Your beliefs do not diminish mine.
So, in my mind, the senators that made a big deal out of this are wrong. They also gave a wrong reason in their filed complaint. I wish I were a part of their consituency to let them know.
This one paragraph is what I tried to say on the whole thread. You did a much better job. Thank you.
this from a little document that founds our country: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
I would possibly walk out on public Muslim prayers since this is not a Muslim founded nation, thank heavens."
Two valid observations.
Hmmm. What group of "christians" would be presumptuous enough to do that?
Mormons maybe?
Why should a Christian be less than a Christian... no one asks the Hindu to be less, the Muslim to be less, the Jew to be less...
The Pastor wasn't preaching, he was praying. He wasn't evangelizing, he was praying. Big difference. He was invited... He wasn't imposing anything on anyone.
If the lawmakers are going to get that bent out of shape over this, then perhaps they need to find other careers. They are awfully thin-skinned to be in politics.
BTW, good afternoon. I am absolutely appalled at what the Arab media has been saying about the war. They are practising incitement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.