NEWDOW et al v. ROBERTS et al

Filing 13

Memorandum in opposition to re 4 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction filed by JOHN ROBERTS, JR, JOINT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE ON INAUGURAL CEREMONIES, DIANNE FEINSTEIN, ARMED FORCES INAUGURAL COMMITTEE, RICHARD J. ROWE. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7: Groppel Declaration, # 8 Exhibit 8: Minear Declaration, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Text of Proposed Order)(Rosenberg, Brad)

Download PDF
__________________________________________________________________________________ The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School Department of Speech Communication 'God Bless the President': The Rhetoric of Inaugural Prayer A Thesis in Speech Communication Martin Jay Medhurst Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 1980 __________________________________________________________________________________ TABLEOF CONTENTS ~: ABSTRACT LIST OF ............................ TABLES ......................... ........................ Page iii vi vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Chapter I. Introduction ...................... Prayer ............... l 34 71 150 201 262 323 383 478 528 626 634 2. Prelude 3. to Inaugural The Roosevelt Years:A Rhetoricof SocialJustice. . 4. The TrumanInaugural: Loyalty,Legitimation, and Paradox ......................... B. Dwight D. Eisenhower: The Politics of Faith ...... 6. John F. Kennedy: American-Democrat-Catholic ...... 7. LBJ: Image, Ego, and the 'Ordination'of Prayer .... 8. The Nixon Years:Inaugural Prayeras Rhetorical Foil . . 9. The CarterInaugural: Rhetoric Confession A of and Celebration ....................... lO. The Rhetoricof Inaugural Prayer:A Forty-Year Synopsis ........................ APPENDIX A: Examples of the American Mythic Tradition..... BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................... __________________________________________________________________________________ 57 appeared. The occasion was the inauguration the United States. Samuel Provoost: First The similarities of the first President of Inaugural Clergyman of Jacob Duch6 in 1774 and between the selection Samuel Provoost in 1789 are worthy of note. Both men were well-known membersof the clergy whose prior attention of men in the political ability reputations brought them to the sphere. Both were Anglicans who possessed oratorical however, both initiated and a commandingpresence. More importantly: traditions under controversial circum- rhetorical stances. Many scholars agree with Leo Pfeffer "first when he notes that the chaplain of the Continental Congress was selected on the basis considerations. ''50 birth. The Debate Over Divine Service The "new Government" of the United States convened at Federal Hall Inaugural prayer seems to have had an of political equally political in NewYork City in April of 1789. It was not until from Virginia April 5: however: that Richard Henry Lee arrived to form a quorum. Two days after securing a quorum, Congress appointed a committee "to take under consideration because it the manner of electing that officially chaplains. "51 This is important there was no chaplain when the new Although 7, indicates government gathered under the guidance of the Constitution. chaplains had served under the Articles 1789, no one officially States Congress. of Confederation, on April occupied the position of chaplain to the United __________________________________________________________________________________ 58 A chaplain had not been elected to America's legislative body since 1785 when Reverend Samuel Provoost and Reverend John Rodgers were selected. It was now necessary to settle on a method for selecting a new chaplain. On April 15 the con~ittee composedof Oliver Ellsworth, Richard Henry Lee, Caleb Strong, William Maclay, and Richard Bassett reported, That two chaplains, of different denominations, be appointed to Congress for the present session, the Senate to appoint one, and give notice thereof to the House of Representatives, who shall, thereupon, appoint the other; which chaplains shall commence their services in the Houses that appoint them, 52t shall interchange weekly. bu This report was accepted and Saturday, April 25, was designated as 15 the date to elect a chaplain to the Senate. However, between April and 25 other business was being conducted. On April 23, for example, a committee madeup of Richard Henry Lee, Ralph Izard, and Tristram Dalton was appointed to work out the details President. for inaugurating the new con- This committee had apparently received instructions 5 cerning Washington's wishes concerning the ceremony. 3 Whether these instructions included any mention of a church service is unclear. It is apparent, however, that Lee's committee decided to include divine service as an official part of the inauguration exercises. What makes this story more interesting, April later, as well as more complex, is that on 25, Samuel Provoost was elected chaplain to the Senate. Two days on April 27, the Senate committee madeits recommendations. On the morning of the 27th Richard Henry Lee's committee submitted the following report: Resolved. That after the oath shall have been administered to the President, he, attended by the Vice-President, and membersof the Senate, and House of Representatives, proceed __________________________________________________________________________________ 59 to St. Paul's Chapel, to hear divine service, to be 54rformed by the chaplain of Congress already appointed. pe This resolution prompted considerable dissent on the Senate floor and led Senator Maclay of Pennsylvania to note in his diary: Lee offered a motion to the Chair that after the President was sworn . . . the Congress should accompanyhim to Sain~ Paul's Church and attend divine service. This had been suggested in Joint Committee. But Lee said expressly that they would not agree to it. I opposed it as an improper business after it had been in the hands of the Joint Committee and rejected, as I thought this a certain method of creating a dissension between the Houses. Izard got up in great wrath and stuttered that the fact was not so. He, however, would say nothing more. I made an effort to rise. The Vice-President hurried 55 question and it was put and carried by the churchman. the It is unclear whether Maclay meant "churchman," as he wrote, or churchmen. The second choice is the more probable in light of Clarence Bowen's contention that the "question of holding services on the day of the inauguration had been agitated by the clergmen in town. "56 Yet: inconceivable. the choice of the singular "churchman" is not altogether There was a person in the room whose primary reason for being present was his role as a churchman. The man was Samuel Provoost and he delivered a prayer that very day. According to Maclay, Provoost had opened the session with a prayer before any business had been transacted. Strangely enough, Maclay records a prayer only on the 27th. Maclay's only mention of prayer between April instance on the 27th of April. Bowenalso located Provoost in the middle of the controversy over holding services as part of the inauguration: WhenBishop Provoost was applied to on the subject he replied: so Ebenezer Hazard wrote, that the Church of England 'had always been used to look up to Governmentupon such occasions:' and he thought it prudent not So do anything till they knew 5z at Governmentwould direct. wh 24 and May 19 was this single __________________________________________________________________________________ 6O That the good bishop was as neutral as this quotation would suggest is doubtful. As the immediate past chaplain to Congress and the man just chaplain under the Constitution: for any religious Provoost doubtless service would fall elected the first realized that the responsibilities to him. Such an honor would have placed Bishop Provoost in a position similar to that held by the Archbishop of Canterbury during the English Perhaps Hazard was aware of the possibly feigned the good bishop never prays without an coronation service. disinterest when he added: "If order from Government: it is not probable that the kingdom of heaven ''5l8 suffer muchfrom his violence. wi l In spite of Senator Maclay's objections the Senate passed the resolution concerning divi~e service and sent it to the House for conthe House currence. On April 29: one day before the inauguration: amending it to read: passed the resolution That after the oath shall have been administered to the President, the Vice-President and membersof the Senate: the Speaker and membersof the House of Representatives, will accompanyhim to Saint Paul's Chapel to hear divine 5ervice performed by the Chaplains of Congress. s9 The amendmentsto the original ing. The House inserted resolution are particularly leader: enlighten- a reference to their the Speaker~ to balance the reference to the Vice-President. lain" singular to "Chaplains" plural: representative They also changed "Chapto insure that their thus trying spiritual would be included in the proceedings. By all accounts: he was not. 60 One of the important points to no~e: however, is that throughout the debate the issue is no___~t separation of church and state. The issue is the relationship between the two houses of Congress. that such a service Even Naclay's disapproval was based on the belief would cause "dissension between the Houses." There is no indication __________________________________________________________________________________ 61 that anyone thought it improper to mix the religious and the political realms. This is not surprising since the closest thing to an inaugurawas the English coronation tion with which these men were familiar service. A Ceremonial Pattern. The ceremonial pattern with which Lee and his committee memberswere most familiar The coronation, religious however, was not really was the English coronation. "a civil but an important ceremony."61 Indeed, it was none other than the Archbishop in 1761. of Canterbury who placed the crown upon the head of George III 62ayers were an integral Pr part of the coronation service in England. with English protocol It was only natural that men who were familiar should seek to imitate, 63 ceremonials. at least in part, this most impressive of Of course, not everyone in America was enamouredwith kingly ceremony or Other rituals debate over the p~oper title convictions which smelled of royalty. The well-known for the new leader demonstrates the strong Maclay on the which this issue engendered. Somecongressmen, like of Pennsylvania, not only objected to bestowing a special title leader but also found ceremonies in general objectionable. recorded his unreserved views on this subject in his diary, full opportunity Maclay "I have had of observing the gentlemen of NewEngland," he wrote, but ne people in the Union dwell more seem to "and sorry indeed am I to say it, on trivial distinctions and matters of mere form. They really and ceremony. ''64 w a readiness to stand on punctillio sho Comparedto the English coronation of 1761, Washington's first inauguration was anything but ceremonious. On inauguration day a joint But committee was appointed to escort the new leader to Federal Hall. __________________________________________________________________________________ 62 the committee arrived hour late. discovered atWashington's place of residence Chancellor more than an While the escort that was in route: Robert Livingston An aide ran to there was no Bible on the premises. St. John's Lodge of Free and Accepted Masons to secure a copy of the holy book. When Washington arrived fusion. istering No one had planned the last of the oath. Finally: at Federal Hall there was more con- few steps leading Up to the admininto his own Washington took matters hands and: along with Samuel Otis and Robert Livingston, onto the balcony overlooking the crowd. stepped out Washington placed his hand on the Bible office: I of of of and repeated the oath of do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office the President of the United States: and will, to the best my ability: preserve, protect: and defend the Constitution the United States. word still lingered in the air, Washington added sponhowever: response, the admin- As the last taneously, originate it "I swear: so help me God." The phrase did not: The new President coronation service. borrowed this Following with Washington. seems, from the English istering of the oath to the King: the newly crowned Sovereign would and place his hands upon the Bible. which I have here before promised, The Sovereign He would then perform and the kneel at the altar say: "The things I will keep. So help me God. ''65 Bible. This was exactly of England would then kiss his impromptu what Washington did following exclamation. Inside St. Paul's Chapel. Following the administering of the oath, Washington walked with the members of the House and Senate to St. Paul's Chapel as tile congressional resolution had directed. Inside the church __________________________________________________________________________________ BishopSamuelProvoost, Chaplain the UnitedStatesSenate, of read prayers from the "Proposed" Book of CommonPrayer. Vlhether is true it that Washington listened the same prayers to whichhe "had heardsince ''6 his ~oyhood days in the churchat Fredericksburg 6 is unclear. The "Proposed" Bookhad been formulated 1786 and contained in many changes from the English Book of CommonPrayer.Severalpsalmswere omitted from the Psalter,"the Benedicite was omitted. . the NiceneCreed and the Athanasian were entirely omitted; the clause'He descended into " hell'was dropped from the Apostle's Creed,67 and many othersignificant ~hanges c occurred. Unfortunately, does not appear.that records the service it any of or prayersinsideof St. Paul'sChapelare now extant. Leicester C. Lewis'work on the historyof the Trinity Churchparishseemsto point to thisconclusion. ~Vriting Lewis'history in aboutthe centennial celebratioof the firstinauguration, n RectorMorganDix noted: As to the Orderof DivineService be used in St. Paul's to on the Centennial Day, the general desirewas to reproduce, if possible, the very service held in the Chapelone hundred years before.Unfortunately was found impossible do it to this for the lack of information, no draftof that service as could anywhere found.The newspapers the period,the be of archives the Parish, of the minutes the vestry, of were all searched, but withoutsuccess, nor does it appearthat there is any~vhere existence fullaccount the services in a of then held,thoughsomething the kind may possibly foundin of be 68e filesof private th letters the period. of More recentinquiries have also failedto locatethe manuscript used by 6 SamuelProvoost when he spokeinsideof St. Paul's.9 According Douglas to Freeman, "Doctor Provoost did not preacha sermon"70 but simplyread from the prayerbook.FisherAmes,who was , one of thoseinsidethe chapel, laterwrote,"I was present the pew in with the President, must assureyou that,after makingall deductions and __________________________________________________________________________________ 64 for the delusion of oneis fancy in regard to characters: I still think of him with more veneration than for any other person. ''71 After singing the Te Deum~ Washington entered his carriage and was driven to his residence. A tradition not occur until had been born: bu~ its second birthday would nearly a century and a half later. __________________________________________________________________________________ 69 50. 51. Leo Pfeffer, Church State and Freedom, rev. ed. (Boston: Beacon Press, 1967), p. 248. See Joseph Gales, Senior, compiler, The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States: vol I (Washington: Gales and Seaton, 1834), p. 18. Gales, The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States, vol. I, p. 19. General Washington arrived at Elizabethtown, NewJersey, on the afternoon of April 23. He was immediately escorted into NewYork C~ty by the Joint Committee and thus had several days in which to makehis wishes known to Congress. Gales, The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States, vol. I, p. 25. William Maclay, The Journal of William Maclay United States Senator From Pennsylvania, 1789-1791 kNewYork: Albert and Charles Boni, 1927), p. 4. Clarence Winthrop Bowen, "The Inauguration of Washington," The Century Magazine, 37 (April, 1889), p. 824. Bowen, "The Inauguration of Washington," p. 824. Ebenezer Hazard, quoted in Bowen, "The Inauguration of Washington," p. 824. Gale, The Debates and Proceedings in the Congress of the United States, vol. I, p. 241. The House did not select a chaplain until May l--the day after the inauguration. They elected the Reverend William Linn. W. J. Passingham, A History of the Coronation (London: n.d.), p. 18. At t~e coronation of King George III in 1761 no less than six prayers were read as part of the service. For a detailed description of this service as well as the complete texts of the prayers offered see Richard Thomson, ed., A Faithful Account of the Processions and Ceremonies Observed in the Coronation of the Kings and Queensof England (.London: Printed for John Major, 1820), pp. 48-62. For other aspects of the English coronation see B. Wilkinson, The Coronation in History (London: George Philip and Son Ltd 1953); William Jones, Crowns and Coronations (London: Chatto and Windus, 1883); Lewis Broad: Queens, Crowns and Coronations (London: Hutchinson and Co. Ltd.: 1952); Rev. Robert H. Murray, 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. __________________________________________________________________________________ 7O The Kinq's Crownin9 (London: John Murray, 1936), and E. Ratcliff, The English Coronation Service CLondon: Skeffington and Son Ltd., 1937). 64. 65. 66. Maclay, Journal, p. 5. See Thomson,ed., A Faithful Account, p. 55. Douglas Southall Freeman, George Washington: Patriot and President, vol. Vl (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 19541, pp. 196-197. Francis Procter and Walter HowardFrere, A NewHistory of the Book of Common Prayer (London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd., 1911), p. 239. See pages 234-252 for a complete discussion of the evolution of the American Prayer Book. See also Leighton Pullan, The History of the Book of Common Prayer (London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1900), pp. 274-294; G. J. Cuming, A History of Anglican Liturgy (London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1969), pp. 168-212; Massey Hamilton Shepherd, Jr., The Oxford American Prayer Book Commentary (New York: Oxford University Press, 1950). Leicester C. Lewis, ed., A History of the Parish of Trinity Church in the City of NewYork, Part V (New York: ColumBia University Press, 1950), p. 173. These inquiries included letters from the author to the Library of Congress, the National Archives, the General Theological Seminary, and JamesThomasFlexner. Freeman, George Washington, p. 197. Seth Ames, ed., Works of Fisher Ames, vol. I ~Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1854), p. 34. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. __________________________________________________________________________________ CHAPTER 3 THE ROOSEVELT YEARS: A RHETORIC SOCIAL JUSTICE OF The dignitaries inside that of St. Paul's the privilege would not fall years. part Chapel on April of hearing 30: 1789, at the could not have realized inauguration another prayers of a president to an American audience for Not until January 20, 1937, one hundred and forty-four as an official was a prayer offered inauguration. of the American ceremony of of inaugural its At the 1937 inaugural, The circumstances however, the practice and personalities prayer was reborn. revival surrounding and subsequent establishment as a mainstay of the contemporary core of this chapter. ceremony of inauguration form the central The Senate Tradition As demonstrated in the last religious and the political chapter, the intermingling of the spheres under the rubric role as the first of prayer is not clergyman new. Just as Bishop Provoost's grew out of his affiliation rebirth of inaugural prayer. prayers inaugural with the Continental Congress, so the tradition of prayer grew out of the continuing From the re-appointment have been an abiding congressional to the present, gressional day. of Jacob Duch~ in 1776, component of the con- Since the Congressional prayers Record only began to record legislative However, a sampling in 1885, a complete record does not exist. __________________________________________________________________________________ 72 .of Senate prayers from the fifty-year ~he ongoing nature ness: special repeatedly period prior to 1937 demonstrates The myths of chosenand rebirth Even if appear of the American myths of state. mission: sacrifice: of this death, period. destiny, in the Senate prayers delivered one confines to the the sample to prayers in the Senate chambers prior discern swearing in of the new members, one can easily myths. the underlying In the Senate ceremony of 1885 Chaplain E. D. Huntley tapped into the mythic element of America as God's chosen nation when he said: under the direction of Thy Holy Spirit . . . his [Cleveland's] administration shall prove a signal blessing to this nation l and so a blessing to the world, Thus: that well for which bodes well for America was viewed as necessarily boding the rest of the world. This view was qu~te in keeping with the role. sounded the 2ominant notion d of America's millenial Four years later notes on each part in 1889: Senate Chaplain J. G. Butler scale. of the mythi.c He began by recognizing presence of the Deity at the nation's birth: our covenant called, but We worship Thee~ the God of our fathers, j od and Father. G Not only was the Deity the same one upon whom the fathers He was a power who had covenanted with the American people. Just as God God made a covenant with Abraham in Old Testament times, had made a covenant with America. Butler inspired so this took cognizance of the sacred documents which the Deity had by praying: We bless Thee for all the truth and righteouness embodied in the Constitution and laws of this Republic. We thank Thee for the faith of the fathers and for the faith and piety and patriotism and wisdom of their sons. __________________________________________________________________________________ 73 ~~: the Chaplain drew attention to the inherent sacredness of the American philosophy of government. This philosophy was sacred for it contained the truths of God who~ in his mercy, had revealed them to the fathers of the Republic. The fathers, and patriotisms" as faithful servants of the Deity: inter- responded with "piety changeable. the terms being virtually Butler returned to the theme of an unbroken covenant whenhe said: Webless Thee for the rich heritage of freedom coming to us: and we thank Thee: 0 God: that in all our history Thou hast guided and defended us. Again: the deity had been faithful explicitly to his covenant. The Chaplain played the chord of chosenness by praying: Bless the great people of this land ~manuel's land. Implicit in this request was the assumption that the interests of the American people were the same as the interests realizing their own interests, of the Deity. Hence: by be making their the people would truly land Emanuel's land. In this process America would becomea beacon light to all the nations of the world. As Butler said: Amongthe nations of the earth Thou has exalted us. Make us a pattern nation: 0 God: and let Thy blessing rest upon these Thy servants. In 1893 Butler again offered a prayer in the Senate chambers in which he recognized the hand of God in the creation of the nation. Webring to Thee our heart homage: God of our fathers: thanking Thee for our rich heritage of faith and of freedom: hallowed by the toils and tears: the valor and blood and prayers: of our patriot dead.4 To the Chaplain: faith The faith and freedom were inextricably linked together. in the Deity produced the freedom~ or so the Chaplain seemed dead sent up prayers so Butler: likewise: to imply. The patriot __________________________________________________________________________________ 74 ~@~i~ionedthe Deity that "in the futures as in the past, the unseen ~bandmaylead us." Butler left little doubt that the millenial kingdom was to be the people of this endeavor . and ushered in through the American nation: "Bless all great nation~" he prayed: "prospering every right bringing in the reign of peace and righteousness more and more." America was God's instrument and through this instrument the Deity would effect righteousness on earth. The beginning of this heaven on earth extended back to the birth of the nation. For Chaplain Edward E. Hale, America was God's new Israel. Senate prayer of 1905 Hale quoted from scripture: I will multiply my people, they glorify them~ and they shall not be n~ people and I will be your neither be discouraged. For the 5 withersoever thou goest, shall not be few. I will be small . . . and ye shall God .... Be not afraid, Lord Thy God is with thee between God In his This was a succinct statement of the perceived relationship and America. If there was any doubt about the nature of this relationship: Hale eliminated it in 1909 when he said: Thou has been pleased to makethis people Thine own 6ation. n Thus: from its beginning: America was a nation set apart, a country chosen for a purpose: a people sacred and true. What evolved in America was the work of God. As Chaplain Forrest Prettyman noted in 1917: Thou hast given us a vision of a fair ~... of civilization.7 and beautiful form ~t was this divine vision which had guided the leaders of the nation and that helped them to becomeGod's representatives here on earth. Just as __________________________________________________________________________________ ITI', I . " f~e~Deity 75 called the world into existence by the power of his Word, so As ZeBarney Phillips noted in tie::spoke the words that created America. his Senate prayer of 1929: f: f! fi I l IT I ~ ;~ ~ ~ t" Thou has called us by our name and we are Thine. Thou has established us in the gateways of the world. Thou hast moulded our speech, mixed our blood from uncorrupted springs and crowned us with every blessing; make us therefore a righteous nation. S One finds in every inaugural prayer offered in the Senate chambers prior to the inauguration of the president explicit statements dealing with the myth of the creation~ J fi the relationship of the Deity to the creative act, and the sacred character of America as a chosen nation which has covenanted wi'th an eternal God. Such mythic statements were in keeping As members f " f ~ ~ with 'the social position of the persons doing the praying. df the dominant religious group--Protestant clergymen--these pray-ers Eduld sing the praises of the Deity and recite the cosmogonic myth with lHtle hesitation. 9 In addition, their audience was limited to those elite few who could gather within the Senate chambers, the majority of whom were of Protestant orientation. Repetition of the mythic themes invited the listeners to think of their nation in sacred terms. As the nation's sacred character increased, i ~ the religions spawned by the nation also became more sacred and secure through their identification with the national ethos. By testifying to the endorsement of the nation by God, the pray-ers were also testifying to the legitimacy of their position within the American religious struc t u r e . 10 In 1937, hOl'iever, a marked change occurred. Not only was inaugural prayer reborn, but it \'ias reborn in the wake of religious and political turmoil. In the midst of this turmoil one found not only a __________________________________________________________________________________ 76 to..:.' . ;::'~'': ..... ' .:~~~i::~- "', . ~.;~~~~:~.:.-. i;:\iT:r,r;/':~Who:recognized '.:{;;~;~;;<:~:a::~president who understood the rhetorical character of ceremony and ;)~;~~T~Pr~testant ~~f~~~~~;i;j.t:: .~. chaplain, but also a Roman Catholic priest. One also found ~~~~~~;?~~~~t~'. ':':"';:~,'3~>- the influence of religious authority. It was in this context that contemporary inaugural prayers were instituted by fiat on January 20, 1937. Transfonning Traditions The inaugural ceremony of 1937 was a pacesetter in several respects. :. . . ;, :' ~'. First, it marked the first time in the twentieth century that the Vice Rresident had taken the oath of office on the same platform and in the same ceremony with the President. The usual procedure until 1937 was to administer the oath of office to the Vice-President-Elect at the close Of;~the regular legislative session. This allowed the Vice-President Elect to act in his role as President of the Senate and thus to preside ~. ' .... over the Senate on inauguration day. Since he was already sworn in he would simply read his address to the Senators and then preside over the swearing in of the Senators-Elect. All of these activities took . i ., :i ,- place within the Senate chambers and thus out of the sight of the general public. c " f .:;' When the Senate had concluded its business it would usually move to the east portico of the Capitol where the inauguration of the .": . President would take place. From 1793-1933 there were no prayers The only prayer delivered at the presidential inauguration per se. was that delivered by the Senate chaplain in accordance with normal operating procedures. In 1937, however, a new twist was added. Not only'-did the Vice-President-El ect join the President-El ect on the __________________________________________________________________________________ 77 inaugural platform, but the chaplain of the Senate also appeared on the platfonn to open with praxer. Hence, a practice \"hich had originated in This shift of t.~ ~f; f~: Congress was transplanted to the inaugural ceremony. '~enue is significant for it set a precedent for all future inaugurals. Whereas the chaplain's prayer was originally directed to the Senators, it now became directed to all attending the inaugural ceremonies as well as those listening or viewing via the media. :',0,', The transplanting of the chaplain was not the only significant In addition to placing the chaplain in thange that occurred in 1937. the public arena. Roosevelt introduced the first non-chaplain pray-er. Not only was the second pray-er a non-chaplain, but he was a non P r o t e s t a n t as well. This marked the first time in inaugural history i;li ' f that anyone other than a Protestant clergyman had delivered an inaugural prayer. ll The pacesetter in this regard was the Right Reverend John A. _ t' ., Ryan'of Catholic University in Washington, D. C. Ryan became the first Catholic to pray at an inaugural ceremony and at the same time acqUired ~erdistinction t:;~r)'c.: '0') ~';"+!f>' ,'" of being the first person to deliver an inaugural benediction. ceremonies. ::\ a-. , . Until 1937 there was no benediction pronounced over the A close examination of the presidential addresses from ~; ."',,,'0,:;;.':'?;~~~' [,' t ~ f:~r~~I,L .. C.:':': ',' " ,- . . - - - - - - """', 1'793-1933 reveals that the newly elected leader often provided his own B~n~alction in the last few lines of his address. Roosevelt ended his address: .-. :""'~., I I .... ," : In 1933, for example, & i " ~, f. ~, '-'- ' I n this dedication of a Nation we humbling ask the blessing 9f . God. I'lay He protect each aDd everyone of us. May He gUlde me in the days to come. l~ ..,'01O ne mfght think that by introducing a clergyman to deliver a b~ned~ction the mini-benediction would gradually drop out of the "l",~"i" row' . . .. . ; ti "-cj""'" 1 ... ({ ~ ",::.':<::'.T:. ~ I r I ," , 1. ... ... ~...'.:-;..~ -.' __________________________________________________________________________________ 78 ~1t~in~~gUral address. ~p!:: Such has not been the case. Clifford Owsley notes :~:::that ..... I ~ ',. , .." ...' "wi t h only one exception, every President invoked the blessings ';'~';of-God on his administration and the country in the terminal of his ; ':. _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _________ _ 1~a.~gural r.h~odore address, or in one of them if he delivered more than one. Roosevelt, who made only one inaugural address, did not follow 'fhe tradition. 1113 .' ' l.'~ ';: If the benediction did not affect the inaugural address, one might Indeed, why was there a reasonably ask why it was included at all. ;, to. qenediction in 1937 when there had never been one in the entire history qf;p'residential inaugurations? ft-r~~" i;~:, " IU I", _ To answer this question one must return One must tOrthe days prior to Roosevelt's ascent to the presidency. t- ~eturn,to . i : :L: .,; (. the sources from which Roosevelt's rhetorical use of religion g~ew., v; (.. '.-I I ,=.,.~.' '. ' As we shall see, the rebirth of inaugural prayer was but one . manjfestation of a much larger pattern involving Roosevelt's conception .).:: . """I"."" qf.~the .",., t~~ relationship between religion and government . Franklin Roosevelt was . Roosevelt and Religion--The Beginnings. ~?:r;tiGularly ~: .' ~:~>: ... t., qualified to be president of a country where over 95 percent V ~h;:;:i::.~::.;:,;,~ : t;,:cf~;':""':t of ,the . population claimed to believe in a Supreme Being, for Roosevelt '. . . , \'{as,~imse1f, ,," a believer. Raised by a mother of unitarian leaning and r~,,~~~~t ., qJather dedicated to episcopalianism, the young Franklin learned love . g[ God and Church at a tender age. A communicant at St. James Episcopal Church in his native Hyde Park, Franklin Roosevelt never lost the belief . r. ~ r ._-----_... -_..-=-:.-'.:... ,; 9!._~is ~., youth. ~, ;.__., Roosevelt's belief \vas strengthened at Groton, a private prep "w,'.. ; . ..'~i.;'.,.~;::;:.:::), [; if tl ~5rBB1~in Massachusetts, where the future president came under the f g ~ ![Qn~,jn~e of the Reverend Endicott Peabody, an influence that \vould i r 1 __________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________ 141 NOTES 1. E. D. Huntley, quoted in Congressional Record--Senate (1885), p. 1. 6: '., ", " " , ,;. 2. For more detail on the dominant conceptions of America's millenial role and mission see Ernest Lee Tuveson, Redeemer Nation: The Idea of America's t'lillenial Role (Chicago; University of Chicago Press, 1968); H. Richard Niebuhr, The Kingdom of God in America (New York: Harper Brothers, 1937); Sacvan Bercovitch, The Puritan Ori ins of the American Self (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1975 ; Perry Miller, The Life of the Mind in America from the Revolution to the Civil War (New York: Harcourt, Brace and tvorld, 1965); Sherwood Eddy, The Kin dom of God and the American Dream (New York: Harper and Row, 1941 ; Darroll M. Bryant, "America as God's Kingdom," in Jurgen Moltmann, et al., eds., Religion and Political Society (New York: Harper and Row, 1974); and J. F. Maclear, liThe Republic and the Millenium,1I in Elwyn A. Smith, ed., Religion of the Republic (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1971), pp. 183-216. 3. J. G. Butler, quoted in Congressional Record--Senate, 51st Congress (1889). p. 1. " ','. ," 4. J. C. Butler, quoted in Congressional Record--Senate, 53rd Congress (lB93), p. 1. 5. Ed~ard E. Hale, quoted in Congressional Record--Senate, 59th Congress (1905), p. 1. 6. Edward E. Hale, quoted in Congressional Record--Senate, 51st Congress (1909), p. 1. 7. Forrest J. Prettyman, quoted in Congressional Record--Senate, 65th Congress (1917), p. 1. " 8. ZeBarney T. Phillips, quoted in"Congressional Record--Senate, 71st Congress (1929), p. 3. 9. Conrad Cherry notes that IIduring the ni neteenth century and well into the twentieth, leading spokesmen for the civil religion couched its beliefs in terms that were unmistakeably Protestant. Sacred ceremonies celebrated the hope for the spread of an 'American Christian civilization,' a Christian civilization that was inclusive enough to embrace the diverse Protestant denomina t i o n s but seldom large enough to include Roman Catholics." See Conrad C. Cherry, "American Sacred Ceremonies," in Phillip E. Hammond and Benton Johnson, eds., American Mosaic: Social Patterns of Religion in the United States (New York: Random House, 1970), p. 311. II, ,: i __________________________________________________________________________________ 142 10. The relationship between the "official" pray-ers and the political status quo is a dialectical one. As Berger and Luckmann note: "In other words, conservative political forces tend to support the monopolistic claims of the universal experts, whose monopolistic o r g a n i z a t i o n s in turn tend to be politically conservative. Historically, of course, most of these monopolies have been religious. It is thus possible to say that churches, understood as monopolistic combinations of full-time experts in a religious definition of reality, are inherently conservative once they have succeeded in establishing their monopoly in a given society. Conversely, ruling groups with a stake in the maintenance of the political status guo are inherently churchly in their religious orientation and, by the same token, suspicious of all innovations in the religious tradition." See Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality (Garden City: Doubleday, 1966). p. 123. 11. Ostensibly there had been Senate prayers by non-Protestants. The first and only Catholic to serve as Chaplain of the United States Senate was Constantine Pise in 1832. 12. Franklin D. Roosevelt, IIFirst Inaugural Address," ~larch 4, 1933, in Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents of the United States (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1965), p. 239. All quotations from inaugural addresses are from this source. 13. Clifford D. Owsley, Inaugural (New York: p. 14. 14. Paul K. Conkin, The New Deal (New York: 1967), p. 9. Olympic Press, 1964), Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 15. Conkin, p. 9. 16. Alfred B. Rollins, Jr., "Young F. D. R. and the Moral Crusaders," New York History, 37 (1956), 4.. 17. Ro 11 i n s , p. 14 . The Social and Political Ideas of Franklin D. Roosevelt (East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1958), p. 6. Harcourt, Brace and Co., of a 938, p. 208. 18. Thomas H. Greer, What Roosevelt Thought: 19. James A. Farley, Behind the Ballots--The Personal Histor Politician (New York: 20. Roosevelt, quoted in William E. Leuchtenburg, Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal 1932-1940 (New York: Harper ana Row, 1963), p. 8. 21. Sidney E. Ahlstrom, A Reli ious Histor of the American Peo le (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1972 , p. 920.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?