My mother forwarded to me a petition being circulated by the
American Family Association. Included was a link to
this article. She asked for my opinion about it, and I gave her the short version. I have been thinking about it for a little while now, and I believe that I have a bit more to say. I will not do Mr. Prager the disservice of simply picking at his article. Instead, I would like to simply share my thoughts on the matter.
Why is it that our congressmen swear on the Bible as a part of taking office? The Constitution of the United States reads thusly: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." The oath sworn is this: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God. " Nowhere in the text of the Constitution is there any requirement to use a Bible in the oath.
It is common to swear by something that is regarded as holy by the oath-giver. Breaking the oath is equivalent to renouncing belief in that object and that which it represents. Since Christians believe that the Bible is the Word of God (although there is much disagreement about what that entails), it is considered an appropriately holy thing to swear by. At the time that the United States was founded, most of its citizens were Christians, and most, if not all, of the Senators and Representatives in Congress were Christians. That is, almost everyone in the nation believed that the Bible was a holy object. Such is no longer the case.
Keith Ellison is a Muslim. Although only .5% of Americans claim Islam as their faith (
adherents.org), that is still well over one million people, and the number is rising fast. Furthermore, according to those same statistics, only 76.5% still claim to be Christians. While 76.5% seems like quite a few, that still leaves 23.5% of Americans who are
not Christians, and who therefore do not believe that the Bible is the Word of God.
So, if 23.5% of Americans do not believe that the Bible is the Word of God, what does it mean, to them, that politicians swear on it? Absolutely nothing; they have no regard for the Bible, nor for God, nor for any politician's personal beliefs. If a politician does not believe that the Bible is the Word of God, what does it mean to him or her to swear on it? Nothing. Thus, in the eyes of 23.5% of the population, the oath means nothing. Worse still, those politicians who do not believe are swearing an oath that
they think means nothing! I cannot think that it is auspicious to begin a term of public service by pretending to swear an oath. It would, rather, be better for them to swear by something that they
do believe in, so as to more firmly hold them to their oaths.
There does remain the issue of the supernatural component of an oath sworn on the Bible or any other holy thing. Are there consequences for breaking an oath to God? Honestly, I do not know. My personal belief is that God will treat people based on what is in their heart (1 Samuel 16:7); Christians should beware what they swear by (Matthew 5:33-37), but unbelievers are already damned, so what further harm can a broken oath do?
Speaking of Matthew 5, Jesus commands Christians not to swear oaths at all. It is ironic that we swear by the very book that tells us not to swear at all. Shall we multiply that error by forcing those who do not even believe in the sanctity of that book to swear by it?