Ten Commandments in School

If it’s not about Jesus, it’s not about anything

Motto of the Fountain of Life

Opposition against displays of the Ten Commandments in public buildings seems common in America. Jesus is not the issue here. His identity is not considered relevant. The issue is framed as religious preference shown in government buildings. When the very existence of God is not considered relevant, how can we address this? Although opponents dismiss Him, Christians know that Jesus is the foundation of everything. That includes the freedom and morality discussed here. Although not mentioned directly, Jesus is at the heart of this paper’s defense of the Ten Commandments.

The 9/28/12 edition headline of my local paper was “Monument’s removal demanded.” Two Jane Does sued the Connellsville, Pennsylvania  Area School District. One Jane Doe charged that “The display of the Ten Commandments usurps her parental authority over religious or non-religious education. The 9/28/12 edition also carried a small largely overlooked piece in the Religious Briefs: The German Government asses a 9% religious tax on registered Catholics, Protestants and Jews for the benefit of religious communities.

An earlier edition published a letter which protested the Ten Commandment monument. It succinctly outlined opinions held by many. The author’s question was, “Why has the monument remained there for as long as it has?” He wrote that “the courts settled the issue decades ago with regard to preference of one religion over another in publicly financed schools. Religious dogma belongs in church…”

Today, let us attempt to answer the question and address the Ten Commandment issue from a different perspective. The monument has remained there for so long because the Ten Commandments are intricately woven into the fabric of Western Culture. They stand with the law codes of Solon, the Code of Hammurabi and the Magna Carta as symbols in the evolution of jurisprudence, but more importantly, as symbols of human freedom.

Elevating the tag of religious dogma over the Commandments is an error. They are perhaps the greatest declaration of independence ever written. A slave people labored over 400 years under despots. Upon their release from bondage they were given this declaration of nationhood to assume their rightful place in the political world. Laws make peoples nations. The Commandments were given in that capacity. They formed an unincorporated people into a nation. The people’s religious dogma did not have the capacity to do that. Religious dogma formulated their worship not their citizenship. If anyone wishes to explore their religious dogma one must research their dietary laws, sacrificial laws, purity laws, holy feast days and seasons. This religious dogma does not attach itself to the Commandments.

Here is a good time to reread the 1st Amendment. “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” In reference to preference of one religion over another the Founding Fathers faced the Church of England whose head was the King of England. American Religion offered the moral sanction for the Revolution. That should never be overlooked. Preference of religion was not an issue. The working model opposed by the framers of the Constitution was the relationship of the State to the Church of England. This was not to be tolerated in America. The current situation of the German state religious tax is another model the framers would have opposed.

While on jury duty some time ago, one of the judges advised us upon weighing the evidence presented in cases. One term used was “The reasonable man concept.” In other words, what would a reasonable person do when confronted by the situation faced in the trial? In a similar fashion, would a reasonable person see the display of the 10 Commandments rise to the level of the State of Pennsylvania establishing an organized religion with the Governor as the chief priest, and taxing portions of the populace to support the religion or usurping parental authority?

The plaintiff in the above law suit states that the Ten Commandment monument “places coercive pressure” on her and her student daughter to adopt a certain religious view. Likewise am I also not at liberty to fear that the State’s forceful removal of the monument intimidates my free exercise of religion and coerces my right of free speech and association? Just asking. In fact, I feel no intimidation or coercion from Jewish Americans considering that the Ten Commandments were their commandments 1400 years before they became Christian Commandments.

What symbolic message would removal send? Thou shalt not kill. Is that really religious dogma? I think of Columbine and weep. Perhaps you remember a cartoon. A young girl cried to God, “Where were you when this was happening?” God responded, “I am not allowed in public schools.”

Thou shalt not steal or bear false witness. High grades land good jobs. A student can work hard for that grade or instead lie, cheat and steal for it. Both options are valid in a Ten Commandment Free Zone. The sub-prime meltdown is proof of that. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Students are to realize that they may have multiple sex partners. By extension, multiple partners within marriage is acceptable. Adultery and fornication are only religious dogma and of no consequence in school.

Just as Andes Serano’s 1987 work “Immersion (Piss Christ)” is viewed as art and protected under free speech likewise the Ten Commandments monument may validly be viewed as cultural history and retain its rightful place as a gift by free citizens to the school district which serves them. I want to assure the Jane Does that, properly understood, the Ten Commandments assure them more freedom than they could ever imagine. Much more than any declaration of state’s rights, which may change at the whim of the judiciary or electorate. Freedoms found umbrellaed under the Ten Commandments are inalienable and eternal and universal. That includes the freedom to reject them.

Let me close with perhaps two of the most inflammatory statements possible in the public forum. 'Hear O Israel, the Lord our God is one'. And my personal favorite, "I love you Jesus".

The grace and peace of God our Father and of our Lord Jesus be with you.

Rev.George Relic, Assistant Pastor

Fountain of Life, Washington, PA

A Congregation of Grace Communion International