So Help Me God
In a post below, "Not Law, But Corruption of Law," I quoted Rev. George Rutler, who in turn quoted George Washington's 1796 farewell address:
Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion.
In the comment thread, Adam Freedman posted, as is his wont, a really fascinating observation--so fascinating that I couldn't resist reposting it here, on our homepage, just to make good and certain the entire Ricochetoise got a chance to see it. "We forget," Adam wrote,
how important oaths were to the Founders. The Constitution requires that all
federal officeholders swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. Under late 18th Century law, oaths were valid only from people who believed in a Supreme Being, and an afterlife, with a system of rewards and punishments. It is true that the Constitution prohibits religious tests for office -- meaning that we cannot require federal officials to belong to a particular sect -- but the original understanding was that all officials would be theists, at the least.
- Comment (7)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Mar '11
Re: So Help Me God
That explains why Mr Obama messed up his oath - he believes in himself.
Jun '10
Re: So Help Me God
My boyhood dog was an atheist. For him to behave, an actual human being had to be watching him every second. God watching him didn't count.
Dec '10
Re: So Help Me God
I've long contended that Barack Obama is an atheist. One simply cannot hold the position he holds on the Born Alive Infant Protection Act and believe in a Supreme Being to which one will one day be held to account... let alone a Gospel believing Christian. Barack Obama is a deception perpetrated by the Left and its lapdog media.
BTW, this observation is unrelated to the anti-theists, like Christopher Hitchens and others here at Ricochet, whose admirable passion for justice makes them the new Jacob.
Dec '10
Re: So Help Me God
Yeah, I noticed that, and let it pass.
How seriously can we take this when we contemplate that these same oaths have been taken by people like Wilson, LBJ, Clinton(s), Pelosi, Reid, Obama, etc. Not seriously at all, I would contend.
I do have a question: Don't some religions that we might otherwise consider sound bases of values for governance not include a concept of an afterlife? That part troubled me.
The fake takers of oaths I get; they're deeply corrupted. What about the oath takers that are otherwise reliable, but do not have in their religion the concept of an afterlife? Is this an aspect of Russell's atheistic rejection of the potential for eternal punishment and Lewis' retort?
In any case, I am long past caring about a politician's oath, or anyone elses. I don't value the oath and only consider the person uttering it.
Oct '11
Re: So Help Me God
Yes, it is sad that our "word", our hand shake, our oaths have fallen on such cheap times...
Re: So Help Me God
Thanks, Peter! And to CJ Run's observation...
Possibly, yes, but I think the Founders (and others of that generation) were wise to recognize the corrupting influence of power. Unless one felt compelled by the threat of punishment in the hereafter, the temptation to violate one's belief code is powerful. That is why in English and American law, well into the 19th Century, atheists were not able to take oaths, meaning, among other things, they couldn't serve as jurors or as witnesses in courts. This wasn't an attempt to discriminate against non-Western religions, either. English courts of the 18th century found that Hiduism and Islam could be a sufficient basis for a binding oath.
Oct '11
Re: So Help Me God
This is one of many unspoken presuppositions about the nature of our experiment in ordered liberty that are invisible to most of us today. Thanks to you and Adam for bringing it out.