CNS reports:
An atheist is suing to force the administrators of a towering cross in southern Illinois to return a $20,000 state grant toward its restoration, saying Thursday it was “blatantly unconstitutional” to spend taxpayer money on a Christian symbol.
Caretakers of the 11-story Bald Knob Cross of Peace near Alto Pass, Ill., some 130 miles southeast of St. Louis, insist the grant was legally awarded to the 50-year-old landmark in mid-2008 by classifying it as a tourist attraction, not a religious symbol.
Rob Sherman disagrees, pressing in his federal lawsuit in Springfield, Ill., that the grant violates the U.S. Constitution’s establishment clause used to argue a separation of church and state.
I don’t really care so much about the Bald Knob Cross and I think the atheist guy should get a life. I think this view of the establishment clause is ridiculous but the idea of religious based organizations labeling themselves as not religious but tourism hubs in order to attract taxpayer money is interesting and potentially disastrous.
How do we feel about the concept of Jesus as tourist attraction in order to gain taxpayer funding? Hey, I think there’s a future in this.
If your Church needs a new air condition don’t put out the collection baskets, state your case for taxpayer funding. I can see it now – Step right up folks. Step right up. Thousands of people come every Sunday from far and wide to this one location. The ride starts on Sunday but lasts for eternity and there’s no height limit.
So maybe we start marketing Christianity to our government overlords or perhaps everyone stops looking to the government to fund everything.
This is the danger of a behemoth government because normal people’s taxes will be so high that churches and other charitable organizations will suffer and will essentially have little recourse but to beg the government for funding to continue to exist. And the government might…but with strings attached. There will, of course, be demands of secularization. And if it comes down to a choice between nonexistence or a little secularization, we’ve seen that millions of dollars buys an awful lot of secularization.
In fact, this reminds me of something that happened two years ago. The Jesuit run university Saint Louis University was set to collect some mad Benjamins ($8 million to you and me) when some group of Masons protested that a religious organization was getting taxpayer money.
The Masonic Temple Association sued the school in 2004 by stating that The Missouri Constitution prohibits public funding to support any “… college, university, or other institution of learning controlled by any religious creed, church or sectarian denomination whatever.”
So hungry for the $8 million, the Jesuit University went about proving that it was not controlled by the Catholic church, or even by the ideals of the Society of Jesus. And the worst part is that they won. In a 6-1 decision, the court said SLU “is not controlled by a religious creed.”
So we should all turn away from the temptation of government funding. We should warn each other away from government funding like Odysseus did his crew from the sweet song of the sirens on the shore because they would mean their ruination. (Note: Odysseus’ whole crew all later died in increasingly horrific ways.)
The danger is that religious institutions will no longer be in the soul saving business but in the grant getting business.
August 13, 2010 at 5:09 am
Those are good points, Matthew. Thank you.
There is a massive problem for the Church in accepting any government money as we are sadly finding out in a number of now tricky issues, e.g., homosexuals adopting children, contraception and abortion in Catholic health facilities.
I look at all the many beautiful old churches in Chicago built around the turn of the Twentieth Century by the contributions of mainly recent rural immigrants from Europe and see what can be accomplished by faith and fortitude and not by relying on government (taxpayers) money.
The same prolem holds true for accepting large corporate donations in that our bishops then fall silent in fear of offending their large donor base.
We need to give back to Caesar what is Caesar's. He tends to foul whatever he touches.
August 13, 2010 at 12:18 pm
How to cure an atheist. Send him to a firefight in afganistan. then again you can KICK HIS BUTT ALLOVER the place! (WHICH I PREFER). Then he might mind his own business
August 13, 2010 at 3:55 pm
I live about 40 miles from the Bald Knob Cross, and I think I can safely say that it can be accurately described as a tourist attraction, as well as a religious symbol.
Obviously the cross was originally built as a religious symbol (in the early 1900s, if I'm not mistaken). But my impression is that it has become much more of a destination for tourists than for pilgrims, even though I think that occasional religious services are still held there. So I don't think it is inaccurate to label it a tourist attraction, though it would be inaccurate to label it as only a tourist attraction.
However, I do agree with your overall point about the dangers of churches or other religious organizations taking government money.
August 13, 2010 at 4:58 pm
I read that tax funds were used to build mosques abroad cfr. Pundette. If this suit becomes a precedent, then one can sue this administration for those as well.
August 14, 2010 at 3:19 am
Why do you think Obama is lowering the tax deductions one can take when donating to charities?! They want to harm religious institutions financially, even when most of those charities are far more effective and open with the use of the donations than good ol government.
Well, if this atheist wants to say that gov has no place support a religious symbol, well then I'd like to see them stop all their funding of Planned Parenthood since they worship at the altar of abortion! Ever try speaking to on of these pro abortion people? They make the Spanish Inquisition look like a customer survey questionare…
August 15, 2010 at 2:24 am
Why should the govt fund something like this anyway? Is it federal money? Then, absolutely not–get a state grant if it means that much. Otherwise raise money. It seems ridiculous to complain about the intrusiveness of govt and then turn to the govt every time something in disrepair needs to be fixed, etc. While I am loathe to agree with this atheist, I don't want to pay for this.