The City of Detroit Development Agency offered to pay half the cost of renovating St. John's Episcopal Church. American Atheists took the city to court, saying that the grant violated the establishment clause of the Constitution--and as such, the city has withheld the payment to the church.

The Christian Post is reporting that the federal court has ruled against the atheists.

“Churches cannot be treated as second class simply because they are religious institutions. They have the same right to reimbursement for physical improvements as all other entities have,” said Dale Schowengerdt, a counsel for the Christian legal group Alliance Defense Fund, in a statement.

“No reasonable person would consider a church’s receipt of contractually-promised reimbursement to be a government endorsement of religion. The court agreed that the church was rightfully allowed to be part of the city’s program,” he argued.

The City of Detroit Development Agency made a contract with St. John’s Episcopal Church to improve its outer appearance to help boost the city’s image before the 2006 Super Bowl and to spur economic development in the area, according to ADF, which represented the church’s interests in the suit.

Here's more background from the Detroit Free-Press, last month.

The Associated Press has the fuller picture:

U.S. District Judge Avern Cohn ruled Wednesday that the Detroit Downtown Development Authority should not have awarded the churches matching grants. He said it violated separation between church and state because some of the money was spent on improving large signs and stained glass windows containing religious imagery.

But Cohn ruled that most of the roughly $736,000 was OK because any downtown property owner was eligible to apply and the Central United Methodist Church, Second Baptist Church and St. John's Episcopal Church used the grants on improvements such as lighting, parking lots, sanctuaries and landscaping.

Found here.

October 1 will mark the 50th anniversary of the appearance of “In God We Trust” on the paper currency of the United States. Despite the Establishment Clause, "In God We Trust" (which is also the national motto) has survived repeated legal challenges, and has the strong support of the American public.

The Pew on Religion and Public Life offers a perspective as we near the 50th anniversary:

Many people see the “In God We Trust” motto and other official evocations of a creator as a reflection and acknowledgement of America’s rich religious heritage. Supporters also contend that the motto is simply a recognition of the fact that the people of the United States have always relied on “divine providence.”

But others argue that the government’s evocation of God in any official capacity amounts to the establishment of a state religion, which is prohibited by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Critics also say that “In God We Trust” is divisive because it excludes those who don’t believe in God, as well as Buddhists, Hindus and others who follow non-monotheistic faiths.

An overwhelming majority of Americans support using “In God We Trust” on the country’s currency and as the national motto. For instance, a 2003 Gallup poll found that 90 percent of respondents approved of the use of the motto on coins. A separate Gallup poll in 2004 found that a similar majority expressed support for retaining the words “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance.

The constitutionally of the motto has been challenged more than once, but so far judges have ruled that its use does not violate the First Amendment’s prohibition on the establishment of religion. In the first case challenging the motto, Aronow v. U.S. (1970), the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that “its use is of patriotic or ceremonial character and bears no true resemblance to a governmental sponsorship of a religious exercise.” The case was not appealed to the Supreme Court.

Subsequent challenges have also been turned aside, including the Supreme Court’s refusal in 2005 to hear an appeal to a lower court ruling that the placement of “In God We Trust” on a government building was constitutional. In 2006, a federal district court affirmed the constitutionality of the motto in a suit brought by California doctor and attorney Michael Newdow that sought to have it removed from the nation’s currency. Newdow had previously gained notoriety when he had similarly tried – unsuccessfully – to have “under God” removed from the Pledge of Allegiance.

In general, judges have differentiated the “In God We Trust” motto and similar references to the deity (including the phrase “under God” in the pledge) from other publicly sponsored religious practices, such as prayer and Bible reading in public schools. Most courts view the motto and the pledge as “ceremonial deism,” a legal term for religious statements that are deemed to have lost their fundamental religious character due to their longtime, customary use.

Although the term “ceremonial deism” was first coined in the early 1960s, the government’s acceptance and use of customary religious statements dates back to the nation’s beginning. The Declaration of Independence, for instance, makes reference to God on more than one occasion. And the same Congress that in 1789 passed the First Amendment prohibition on the establishment of religion also started each day with a prayer, as does the current Congress.

The official use of “In God We Trust” dates back to the Civil War era. In 1861, the Rev. M. R. Watkinson, a Christian minister from Ridley Township, Pa., sent a letter to Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase urging “the recognition of the Almighty God in some form on our coins.” Chase agreed and ordered the director of the mint to prepare a motto for use on coins. The director proposed “God, Our Trust”; Chase altered the phrase to “In God We Trust,” which first appeared on a two-cent coin in 1864. The next year, Congress authorized the mint to put the motto on all silver and gold coins that had space for the phrase.

In the decades following the Civil War, “In God We Trust” appeared on most coins. And since 1938, the motto has appeared on all American coinage. In 1956, during the height of the Cold War struggle with the officially atheist Soviet Union, Congress passed a joint resolution, signed by President Dwight Eisenhower, declaring “In God We Trust” to be the national motto. The following year, on Oct. 1, the motto appeared for the first time on paper currency – on the back of the dollar bill.

Read it all here.

From Associated Press religion briefs yesterday, an Illinois Democrat in that state's legislative body successfully changed a law so that schools now are required (rather than have the option) to have a moment of silence at the beginning of each school day, despite the Illinois governor's veto of the measure. Critics are decrying the slippery slope towards "compulsory school prayer," even though the one-word change in the law isn't about prayer at all, says its author, Rep. Will Davis:

An Illinois law called the Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act already allowed schools to observe a moment of silence if they wanted. The new provision changes just one word: "may" observe becomes "shall" observe.

The sponsor of the change, Rep. Will Davis, a Democrat from Homewood, said his goal is not to open the door for teachers to lead their classes in morning prayer but help students calm down and think about their plans.

It's the first story in the briefs round-up, here. Other items of note include a new president of the National Association of Evangelicals, if you're curious about that sort of thing, and another small-town brouhaha over a Nativity scene landing the issue on that locale's Nov. 6 election ballot. (We can see the signs now--Vote for the Baby Jesus!)

A little levity for your morning Café fare. Now, back to your moment of silence...

As the United States Senate began floor debate on the nation's Farm Bill, Washington Bishop John Bryson Chane and five other faith leaders spoke at a news conference November 6 calling for Senators to pass a Farm Bill that creates a "new covenant" with rural America and people living in deadly poverty around the world.

According to Episcopal Life Online a new ad was unveiled at the news conference, signed by 26 Episcopal bishops, calling for the Senate to pass several key amendments to the Farm Bill designed to restore "the moral foundation" of a bill that was created by Congress in the 1930s as a "covenant" with rural America and people in need.

"Congress created the first Farm Bill to be an expression of the character of America and a covenant with farmers rooted in fairness, equity, and opportunity for all," said Chane. "Today's Farm Bill has strayed far from this vision, benefiting primarily large, rich farms while adding to the struggles of hard-working family farmers and exacerbating deadly poverty around the world."

Read more here.

To urge your Senator to vote for the Farm Bill click here.

Ethan Fishman in The American Scholar:

For much of its history, the United States has largely avoided the religious conflicts that have cost other nations countless lives. Our ability to escape such conflicts is grounded in the Constitution’s First Amendment, which requires government to maintain as neutral an attitude as possible toward religion. Fortunately for Americans, past presidents as a rule have sought to honor this neutrality. Today, however, the Bush administration, working with certain religious denominations, seeks to repudiate it.

Drawing on the thinking of Roger Williams, who was exiled from Puritan Massachusetts and founded the Rhode Island colony, he writes:

The Bush administration has ignored Roger Williams’s warning about the corrosive effects on both church and state of the lethal combination of national arrogance and religious self-righteousness. That contrasts with the reactions of Presidents Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and Madison at the turn of the 19th century when North African Muslim pirates were seizing American ships and capturing their crews. The pirates were fond of using quotes from the Koran to justify their criminal activities, and the United States responded in a variety of ways to protect its political and commercial interests in the Mediterranean: they sent in the Navy and the Marines, paid protection money, and ransomed the crews. But these presidents never considered their war against the Muslim pirates to be religiously motivated or to have any religious significance at all.

Since the attacks of September 2001, Bush has insisted on calling America’s reaction a war on terror, and his statements have contained religious imagery comparable to that used by Osama bin Laden. University of Chicago religion professor Bruce Lincoln observes in Holy Terrors: Thinking About Religion After September 11 that both Bush and bin Laden use language that refers to “a Manichean struggle, where Sons of Light confront Sons of Darkness, and all must enlist on one side or the other, without possibility of neutrality, hesitation or middle ground.” The implication of both leaders’ rhetoric is that God supports what may be called a war of “pious cruelty.”

Read it all.

All Saints Church announced today that the IRS has confirmed that it has closed its investigation of the Church, and the Church will not be subject to excise tax in connection with any alleged political campaign intervention. All Saints also reported that, in light of its experience in defending against its own examination, and to support all churches, synagogues and mosques who speak truth to power in the prophetic tradition, it plans to work through federal legislative channels to increase the legal protections available for freedom of the pulpit from ill-founded or politically motivated tax investigations.

Read it all here

Episcopal Life Online reports here

For many years people have suggested that if there is a uniquely American contribution to heresy, it is that of the "Health and Wealth" gospel. The basic idea is that God showers (material) blessings on believers. Thus the more material goods one has, it follows, the more faithful a believer one is. Proponents of the message would challenge this simplified version and would point to many passages in the bible that support their claims.

Over recent years a large group of preachers in America (and in Africa) have begun though to teach this prosperity gospel as a central theme of their message. It follows that the preacher must live out what she or he preaches. So many of the most popular and influential preachers point to their affluent life styles as proof of the depth of their faith.

But their wealth is coming from gifts given by their followers, often given as "seeds of hope" with the expectation that God will reward the giver many times more. And the wealth has not always been properly accounted for in the mind of federal and state tax authorities.

So today, the AP has news describing a move by these authorities to examine the books of the various preachers and ministries:

"Proponents call it a biblically sound message of hope. Others say it is a distortion that makes evangelists rich and preys on the vulnerable. They say it has evolved from 'it's all right to make money' to it's all right for the pastor to drive a Bentley, live in an oceanside home and travel by private jet.

'More and more people are desperate and grasping at straws and want something that will alleviate their pain or financial crisis,' said Michael Palmer, dean of the divinity school at Regent University, founded by Pat Robertson. 'It's a growing problem.'

The modern-day prosperity movement can largely be traced back to evangelist Oral Roberts' teachings. Roberts' disciples have spread his theology and vocabulary (Roberts and other evangelists, such as Meyer, call their donors 'partners.') And several popular prosperity preachers, including some now under investigation, have served on the Oral Roberts University board.
Grassley is asking the ministries for financial records on salaries, spending practices, private jets and other perks. The investigation, coupled with a financial scandal at ORU that forced out Roberts' son and heir, Richard, has some wondering whether the prosperity gospel is facing a day of reckoning."

Read the rest here.

The United Church of Christ is being investigated by the Internal Revenue Service over a speech Senator Obama gave at a church conference in June:

The IRS has notified the UCC that it has opened an investigation into Obama's address at the UCC's 2007 General Synod in Hartford, Conn., the UCC said yesterday.

According to a copy of an IRS letter that the church received Monday, the IRS is launching the inquiry "because reasonable belief exists that the United Church of Christ has engaged in political activities that could jeopardize its tax-exempt status."

Under federal law, churches are barred from becoming directly or indirectly involved in campaigns of political candidates.

According to a text of the speech posted on the church's Web site, Obama promised to sign a universal health care bill in his first term as president, and he denounced the Iraq war.

The UCC has issued a press release announcing the creation of a legal defense fund:

In a Feb. 27 letter to members and supporters, General Minister and President John H. Thomas said the fund was necessary "to ensure that money given for mission will not be needed to pay legal bills, instead of ministry needs."

"In order to adequately defend ourselves as well as protect the broader principle of the freedom of religious communities to entertain questions of faith and public life, we will need to secure expert legal counsel, and the cost of this defense, we are told, could approach or exceed six figures," Thomas wrote. "This is troubling news."

From the church's own reporting of the investigation:

In an introduction before Obama's speech, Thomas said Obama was invited as "one of ours" to provide reflections on "how personal faith can be lived out in the public square, how personal faith and piety is reflected in the life of public service."

Thomas said the IRS's investigation implies that Obama, a UCC member, is not free to speak openly to fellow UCC members about his faith.

In its reporting on the speech at the time the AP wrote

“But somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped being used to bring us together and faith started being used to drive us apart. Faith got hijacked, partly because of the so-called leaders of the Christian Right, all too eager to exploit what divides us,” the Democratic presidential candidate said in a 30-minute speech before a national meeting of the United Church of Christ.

The Episcopal Public Policy Network, an official part of the Episcopal Church can only participate in initiatives that have clear sponsorship by the General Convention or Executive Council. So far, in the years following the most recent General Convention, this work has focused on native american initiatives, climate change, immigration, and economic parity.

But according to a recent communication from the network, their work right now is tracking the following particular areas this spring:

• Indian Health Care Improvement Act Amendments of 2007 -- S. 1200 -- The first update of critical Indian Health Care in 16 years passed the Senate 83-10 in February and is awaiting consideration by the House. We will let you know when the time is right to contact your Representatives.
• America's Climate Security Act -- S. 2191 -- This bill has still not made it to a vote in the Senate, but all the attention on Earth Day and on global warming should help move it. See the Presiding Bishop's letter of support here.
• SAVE Act -- H.R. 4088 -- This is the punitive immigration legislation whose House sponsors are working to bring it to a vote without due process and consideration. They need 212 signatures on their petition and currently have 186 -- if you haven't sent a message to your representative, you can still take action here.
• Jubilee Act -- H.R. 2634 -- This debt relief bill passed the House by a strong vote of 285-132 and now awaits consideration by the Senate. We will let you know when the time is right to contact your Senator.
• The GROWTH Act -- H.R.2965, S.2069 -- This legislation to promote economic opportunities for women in developing countries is awaiting action in committees in both the House and the Senate.

If you're interested in more information about these initiatives or would like to get involved, you can find more information about the EPPN's work here.