| Church-state separationists decry Clinton sending envoy to Vatican
By James L. Franklin, Globe Staff
Souther Baptists and other church-state separationists reacted
yesterday with a mixture of anger and resignation to the announcement
that President Clinton will fill the position of US ambassador to the
Vatican.
One of the first statements came from Clinton's own denomination, who
were disappointed that a Southern Baptist president had filled the job.
But others objected to the appointment as "an entanglement" of religion
and government.
An agency representing the nation's largest Protestant body, the
Southern Baptist Convention, said that, in announcing he was naming
Mayor Flynn to the post, Clinton had lost what may be "the last
opportunity to reverse this terribly wrong policy."
Richard D. Land, executive director of the denomination's Christian
Life Commission, called the president's decision "a triumph of
politics over principle," pointing to Clinton's past stand as a
church-state separator.
"Such a decision by any president is bad, but coming from a Baptist
president it is even worse," Land said, arguing that Clinton "is
seeking to curry favor with Roman Catholics who re justifiably outraged
over his pro-abortion politics."
The Southern Baptist official argued that opposition to diplomatic
relations between Washington and the Vatican has nothing to do with
anti-Catholicism, citing as evidence President Kennedy's rejection of
the idea of naming a Vatican ambassador during his 1960 campaign.
Land said his agency, which was first among the groups to ask Clinton
to leave the Vatican post vacant, will testify against Flynn's
appointment in hearings before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Although they did not publicly renew their long-held opposition to
diplomatic relations with the Vatican since Clinton's election, the
National Council of Churches yesterday called the appointment
"inappropriate and unconstitutional."
"The establishment clause of the First Amendment has long been
interpreted to prohibit the government favoring one church over
another, and this appointment would have the effect of giving one
church preferential access to the federal government that other
churches do not enjoy," said Carol Fouke, spokeswoman for the National
Council.
Americans United for Separation of Church and State objected that the
maintenance of diplomatic relations between Washington and the Catholic
hierarchy violates the First Amendment because it is an unnecessary
entanglement of church and state.
Barry W. Lynn, executive director of the group, also said the fact that
Flynn is a Catholic--like the three ambassadors since President Reagan
began full diplomatic relations in 1984--shows the US government has
established a "de factor religious test for office."
"Article Six of the Constitution forbids any religious test for public
office," Lynn said. "It's bad enough that the relationship is being
continued; the problem is compounded when administration after
administration chooses to select ambassadors from the same faith."
William A. Wilson, a rich California rancher and real estate developer,
was appointed the first ambassador by Reagan, a close friend. Thomas
P. Melady, former president of Sacred Heart University in Brideport,
Conn.,, was ambassador to Burundi and Uganda before he was named to the
Vatican post. Frank Shakespeare, a former CBS television executive,
had been head of the US Information Agency and ambassador to Portugal,
when president Nixon appointed him to the Holy See.
Americans United noted that Flynn had written to Clinton in January to
support the idea of continuing diplomatic relations with the Vatican.
"It's clear Flynn was putting out a feeler, showing that he was
interested in the job," said Joseph Conn, education director for
Americans United.
The Boston mayor is "another pro-life, fairly conservative Catholic,
cut from the same pattern as the three ambassadors named by Reagan and
Bush," Conn said. "We would have been less alarmed if the president
insisted on naming a Vatican ambassador, if he had appointed a woman or
somebody who indicated to the American people that the job isn't
reserved for conservative, white, male Catholics."
|
| Vatican City is an independent nation. Sure it has a religious person
as head of state but so do lots of other countries that the US has
diplomatic relations with. Is there an other country headed by a religious
leader that we don't have relations with? Besides Iran? Shall we also
cut out relations with countries whose ruler is the head a a religion?
You know, like the United Kingdom. At least the Pope is elected.
> "The establishment clause of the First Amendment has long been
> interpreted to prohibit the government favoring one church over
> another, and this appointment would have the effect of giving one
> church preferential access to the federal government that other
> churches do not enjoy," said Carol Fouke, spokeswoman for the National
> Council.
This arguement is baseless. The US has diplomatic relations with the
Vatican because it is a state not because it is a religious institution.
Clearly it's history for hundreds of years is that of a state as much
as that of a religion.
> Barry W. Lynn, executive director of the group, also said the fact that
> Flynn is a Catholic--like the three ambassadors since President Reagan
> began full diplomatic relations in 1984--shows the US government has
> established a "de factor religious test for office."
Now we're getting real silly. Are there no posts that have been held
by protestant ambassadors only since 1984? A reach like this makes one
wonder if religious bigotry is involved.
> Americans United for Separation of Church and State objected that the
> maintenance of diplomatic relations between Washington and the Catholic
> hierarchy violates the First Amendment because it is an unnecessary
> entanglement of church and state.
We've got relations with lots of countries who can benifit us less
than the Vatican. The Vatican has served as a very useful intermediary
in a number of cases over the years. And they have a great spy network
that one hopes we can use from time to time. :-)
Besides this, what does it hurt?
Alfred
|