Sermon by Rabbi Alan Freedman

Can a Catholic be a Judge?
4 Av 5763
August 1, 2003

                  This week, an event took place which raised an issue which is central to our democracy; that issue is the role of religion in politics and government.  An organization calling itself The Committee for Justice, chaired by the former White House Council for the first President Bush, C. Boyton Gray, ran newspaper and radio ads in Maine and Rhode Island picturing large iron doors with the words Judicial Chambers over them.  Hanging on the doors was a sign that read “Catholics Need Not Apply.”  The sub-title then says “Why are some in the U.S. Senate playing politics with religion?”  The premise of the ad was that certain Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee were delaying President Bush’s nomination of Alabama Attorney General William Pryor to a seat on the 2^nd Circuit Court of Appeals because Pryor is a practicing Catholic.  The claim was that by questioning Pryor concerning his publicly expressed personal beliefs on abortion, which happen to coincide with those of the Catholic church, certain senators were engaging in an unconstitutional effort to bar Catholics from the federal bench. 

                  By the way, the only quotation marks in the ad appear around the term “deeply held” referring to a statement made by Ted Kennedy, of all people, about Mr. Pryor’s personal beliefs.  Sen. Kennedy never said the word Catholic to describe Mr. Pryor’s beliefs, although the ad did, and to accuse Ted Kennedy of being anti-Catholic is a ridiculous as accusing Joseph Lieberman of being anti-Semitic. 

                  The question properly before the Senate is whether Attorney General Pryor is capable of separating his personal religious beliefs from how he rules on the bench.  His obligation is to administer the law according to the Constitution and it is a legitimate inquiry as to whether he can do that in good conscience.  If he is unable to do so, then he should be rejected as a nominee; regardless of his religion.   Whether his personal beliefs have a basis in religion or secular philosophy, those beliefs must give way to the law.

                  What makes this ad so heinous is that it injects religion into politics in a most cynical and cavalier fashion without any appreciation for the consequences.  Cynical because it is a blatant appeal to Catholic emotions along with the fact that the ad was run only in Maine and Rhode Island, two states with large Catholic populations.  Cavalier-because it uses religion as a political weapon without regard for the inevitable risks of injecting religion into political debate.  How far is this type of argument from setting American politics back 40 years to when being a Catholic really was thought to disqualify one from being president?  Granted, this particular ad turns the normal argument against religious prejudice on its head.  Usually the argument is that a particular individual can’t be trusted because of his or her religion.  The argument here is that those who are questioning Mr. Pryor’s suitability for the bench are doing so solely because of his religious beliefs; thus to oppose Pryor is to be anti-Catholic.  Besides being insulting to the Catholics on the Senate Judiciary Committee, it creates an atmosphere where if a candidate’s personal beliefs coincide with those of his religion, then legitimate questions about those beliefs can not be raised for fear that the questioner will be labeled as prejudiced against that candidate’s religion.  For example, if a Reform Jew who personally shared the Reform Jewish establishment’s pro-choice stance not be asked if they in good conscience could enforce an anti-abortion law for fear of being labeled anti-Semitic?

                  Worse, how far away is such an ad from a future ad that really does question a candidate’s loyalty to their country based on his or her religion?  Now, as we prepare to observe the 40^th anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy is the perfect time to recall that there was a time when a Catholic was believed to be barred from high office because of his religious beliefs and that we thought such a time was well in our political past.  But ads like this one raise the religious issue in such a way as to re-open Pandora’s box and once that box is opened there is no telling where it will lead. 

                  Religion has no place in politics.  To be in favor of a separation between church and state is not to be anti-religion.  Attorney General Pryor has every right to his religious and personal beliefs as long as he keeps them off the bench when they conflict with the law.  To ask questions about his ability to do so is not anti-Catholic, it is simply American.