Press Coverage
Press Coverage

The Forward
June 15, 2001

Giving Religion Its Due

By Alan Mittleman

The Supreme Court decided this week in the case of Good News Club v. Milford Central School that it was permissible for a Christian after-school club to meet on the premises of a public school building in upstate New York. Reversing the decision of a lower court, the justices concluded that to restrain the club from meeting, as Milford had done, violated the free speech clause of the First Amendment by discriminating against religious speech. In seeking to forestall any impression that the school "endorses" religion, Milford violated the state's necessary posture of neutrality toward religion, the justices decided.

The school's public forum had been open to private persons and organizations offering educational, artistic, social, civic and recreational opportunities. Religious activities alone were excluded. In this exclusion, the high court sensed hostility toward a religious viewpoint. "[I]t cannot be said," the opinion reads, "that the danger that children would misperceive the endorsement of religion is any greater than the danger that they would perceive a hostility toward the religious viewpoint if the Club were excluded from the public forum."

Although this case was decided on grounds of free speech rather than free exercise of religion, it is nonetheless an important achievement for religious liberty. Regrettably, Jewish organizations already are lamenting the decision, fixated as they are on its alleged potential to weaken the "wall of separation" between church and state. The Jewish community, with some Orthodox and occasional non-Orthodox dissent, lined up as far back as the 1940s against state support for or acknowledgment of an appropriate role for religion in American public life. For several decades, the courts agreed. The last vestiges of America's de facto Protestant establishment -- prayer and Bible reading in schools, the Ten Commandments posted in public buildings, nativity scenes in city halls and so on -- were removed. Jews enthusiastically (and successfully) advocated a "naked public square."

Increasingly, however, the Supreme Court has abandoned the American Jewish conviction that strict separation remains the gold standard of Establishment Clause jurisprudence. In the Good News case, like the Lamb's Chapel and Rosenberger cases before it, the court has realized that excluding religious viewpoints from public forums is unfair, discriminatory and perverse. Whatever else the Establishment Clause means, it cannot mean that religious persons and groups should have fewer rights than other individuals or associations.

When will Jewish groups realize this? The social and cultural situation today is vastly different from that which prevailed when the Jewish organizations devised their church-state strategy decades ago. Neither marginal nor unpopular, Jews are today among the most admired groups in the country. A Pew Forum poll on American views toward religion and politics reports that 88% of Americans have favorable views of Jews, a showing that ties with that for Presbyterians. (Methodists are most favored, at 90%. Lutherans, Episcopalians and Catholics come in slightly behind Jews, at 85%. By contrast, 76% of Americans have a favorable view of Evangelical Christians.) Furthermore, Americans are committed to religious pluralism. Although prayer in public schools remains, despite its constitutional prohibition, rather popular, only 6% of Americans would endorse a school prayer that invokes Jesus. Fully 56% of Americans say that Muslim holidays should be given the same attention as Christian ones in schools if Muslim parents request it. Other recent polls have shown similar results.

The point is that most Americans would be glad to see a pluralistic and civil public square in which religion is neither scorned nor embraced by the state but merely given its due as a potent force in American life. The public square -- or the public school -- should reflect the religious diversity and the religious seriousness of its various publics. The moral beliefs and practices of citizens should not, as in Milford, N.Y., have to be severed from their sources in religious faith. The Supreme Court explicitly rejected this bias toward the secular, disagreeing with the "view that something that is quintessentially religious or decidedly religious cannot also be characterized properly as the teaching of morals and character development." The court properly recognized that Americans cannot and do not separate their deepest moral strivings from their faith.

The right of Christian children to assemble in a Milford school strengthens, rather than threatens, the social and legal climate in which American Jews can thrive. American Jews should seize the day. Rather than cling to a timeworn and feckless strategy, they should reconsider the role of religion in American public life. Rather than worry about every perceived breach in the metaphorical wall of separation, American Jews should join in the national affirmation of religious liberty and diversity.

Mr. Mittleman is a professor of religion at Muhlenberg College and director of Jews and the American Public Square, a project of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs initiated by The Pew Charitable Trusts.

The New York Times
August 12, 2000

Beliefs: Jewish Views on Separation of Church and State Grow More Complex When It Comes to Politics

By Peter Steinfels

While many American Jews waxed enthusiastic about the vice-presidential candidacy of Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, more than a few have also raised eyebrows at his very public expressions of religious faith and his advocacy of a closer partnership between government and religion.

American Jews have long been among the strongest supporters of strict separation of church and state. That has not changed, a new study indicates, despite talk of growing Jewish disenchantment with liberalism and growing popularity of Jewish religious schools.

But the study also shows the complexity of Jewish views, including large gaps between those of the Jewish public and Jewish leadership, and that Jewish leaders appear simultaneously to insist on strict separation of church and state and to defend the involvement of organized religion in political affairs.

Jewish strict separationism dates only from the 20th century. Before that, Jews were generally willing to work within the prevailing assumption that government should be supportive of religion, rather than neutral toward it. Jews simply demanded that Judaism receive the same benevolence and privileges as Christianity.

Jewish attitudes changed, said Jonathan Sarna, professor of American Jewish history at Brandeis University, when prominent Christian churchmen (perhaps feeling their world imperiled by mass immigration, industrialization and urbanization) began campaigning to have the United States explicitly declared a Christian nation. Jews reacted by allying themselves with nonreligious secularists in a struggle to make public schools and other government undertakings religiously neutral.

This background is mentioned in a new survey conducted for the Center for Jewish Community Studies in Philadelphia. It is part of a larger research project on "Jews and the American Public Square," which in turn is part of a cluster of studies financed by the Pew Charitable Trusts of major religious groups and American civic life.

Seeking to detect any recent changes in Jewish views on church and state, the survey compared three groups: a representative sample of American Jews, a representative sample of non-Jewish Americans that mirrored the Jewish sample in educational level and geographic distribution, and a sample of Jewish leaders taken from participants in the annual conference of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, a prominent communal defense agency.

Regarding issues like religion in public schools, government aid or vouchers for religious schools, and the display of Christmas mangers or Hanukkah candles on government property, the study found that American Jews remain firmly separationist. And their leaders are even more so.

For example, 59 percent of the non-Jewish Americans in the study favored allowing nondenominational prayers to be read in public school classrooms. By contrast, only 20 percent of the Jewish public favored allowing such prayers, and for Jewish leaders, the figure dropped to 2 percent.

The Jewish leaders' even stricter separationism cannot be attributed to secularity. On virtually every measure of religiosity or involvement in organized Jewish life, the leaders outscored the general Jewish public. They light Sabbath candles, fast on Yom Kippur, attend synagogues, visit Israel, pursue Jewish education and attest to the importance of Judaism in their lives at significantly higher rates.

At one fascinating point in the survey, this pattern suddenly shifts into reverse. Asked whether "belonging to a church or synagogue makes one a more aware and engaged citizen," the Jewish leaders are more apt to say yes than the Jewish public and virtually as likely as the parallel sample of non-Jews.

Asked whether the clergy can discuss political candidates or issues from the pulpit, twice as many Jewish leaders as members of the Jewish public say yes (73 percent to 35 percent), and more Jews say yes than do their non-Jewish counterparts (35 percent to 30 percent). Half of the Jewish leaders defended the anti-abortion movement's right to use religion in making its case, whereas 42 percent of the non-Jewish counterparts did and 15 percent of the Jewish public.

On the statement, "Churches and synagogues should keep out of political matters," 44 percent of the Jewish public agreed, as did 36 percent of the non-Jewish counterparts; only 14 percent of the Jewish leaders did.

The survey presents an overall "index of support for church involvement in politics," giving the non-Jewish counterparts a ranking of 49 percent, the Jewish public 46 percent, and the Jewish leaders 80 percent.

Explanations for this combination of strict separationism with a defense of religious involvement in politics are not hard to come by. Jewish leaders' commitment to freedom of speech or religion would suffice, and then there is plain self-interest. To some extent, they are simply defending their own role in public policy debates.

Still, the survey reveals some curious anomalies. Fewer than 1 of every 5 Jewish leaders agrees that "democracy in the U.S. works better if Americans are religious," and scarcely more than 1 of 10 rank-and-file Jews agrees. Only 20 percent of the leaders agree that "the influence of religion in American life should increase," and only 30 percent of the Jewish public do.

Stephen M. Cohen of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, who designed the survey, offers an interpretation. Jewish leaders, Mr. Cohen said, "are, indeed, more committed than the Jewish public to the right of religious institutions and leaders to engage in public life and discourse," but, like the Jewish public, the "leaders are unhappy with the actual exercise of that right."

One suspects that the explanation is not so logical, that in-depth interviews would show different phrases conjuring up different images in the minds of the survey's respondents. When asked whether "I am pleased when political leaders publicly affirm their belief in God," Jews are far more likely to think of a Christian political leader than, say, Senator Lieberman.

No wonder that only 22 percent of the Jewish leaders and 30 percent of the Jewish public said yes to that question, compared with 70 percent of the non-Jewish counterparts.

Perhaps this survey should be replicated after a few months of campaigning by Senator Lieberman.

The Boston Globe
July 15, 2000

The Spiritual Life: Jews See US as Secular, Survey Says

By Michael Paulsen

Despite what appears to be a growing inclination among many religious groups, politicians, and judges to chip away at the wall that separates church and state, American Jews remain staunchly opposed to any mixing of religion and public life.

A new survey of the Jewish community finds that, although some factors that have historically contributed to Jewish support of strict separation between church and state have waned, Jews are far more reluctant than non-Jews to accept references to religion in the public schools or other public arenas. "Jews are more secure when society is more overtly secular," said Alan Mittleman, director of the "Jews and the Public Square" project, one of seven surveys funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts examining the contemporary role of religious groups in the United States.

The study also found that on a variety of issues involving sexual morality that have roiled other religious groups, Jews are much more liberal than other Americans. "Jews take a less critical view of homosexuality, abortion, birth control and pornography than do Gentiles," the study found. "In each case, Jewish leaders are even more tolerant than the Jewish public."

For example, 48 percent of non-Jews say homosexuality is wrong, compared to 23 percent of Jews and 7 percent of Jewish leaders. And while 56 percent of non-Jews support abortion rights, 88 percent of Jews and 96 percent of Jewish leaders do.

The findings on church-state separation could have important bearing on the Jewish role in the debate over school vouchers. As the number of children in Jewish day schools has skyrocketed, some Jewish policy makers have suggested that the community supports the use of vouchers, but the survey suggests that Jewish reluctance to support such a step runs deep.

Orthodox Jews have been more sympathetic to the use of public funds to assist children attending religious schools and to the display of religious symbols on public property.

Jewish support for church-state separation traces back to the 1940s, and is driven by concerns that a greater presence of religion in the public sphere means a greater presence of Christianity.

"Absent the protections afforded by church-state separation, many Jews feared that Christian church leaders, in the context of a large Christian majority in the American population, would promote an explicitly Christian character to the American state and its institutions," the study declared. "Jews, in particular, were concerned that the schools not be used to indoctrinate their children in the culture and tenets of Christianity."

Jewish attitudes were intensified by the community's fear of anti-Semitism associated with some Christian groups, and by the community's liberalism and secularity, the study said. In recent years, the study said, Jews have become more accepted in the United States, Jews have become less liberal, and a significant fraction of the community has become less secular, but the attitudes have remained.

Only 38 percent of Jews support allowing the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public schools, compared to 65 percent of non-Jews; 39 percent of Jews would allow the teaching of creationism, compared with 63 percent of non-Jews; and 22 percent of Jews would support vouchers that could be used at religious schools, compared with 43 percent of non-Jews.

The data come from a survey of 1,002 Jews around the United States. Because of the relatively small number of Jews in the United States, the pollsters used a somewhat unorthodox method for assembling a sample - they queried a sample of 600,000 Americans who have agreed to be surveyed by mail on various matters.

The Pew Charitable Trusts is also funding studies of African-American, Catholic, evangelical, Hispanic, mainline Protestant, and Muslim religious populations in the United States. Each study will include a poll, scholarly papers, and conferences over a three-year period.

Jewish Telegraphic Agency
June 27, 2000

Study Finds Gap Between Jewish Public and 'Leaders'

By Sharon Samber

WASHINGTON -- If you were to assume that most American Jews agree with last week's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that student-led prayer at school football games is unconstitutional, you would be right.

According to a new study released last Friday, coincidentally just days after the Supreme Court ruling, only 28 percent of American Jews favor allowing public school students to say prayers at sporting events.

The study, "Religion and the Public Square: Attitudes of American Jews in Comparative Perspective," finds that most American Jews continue to believe that the wall separating church and state ought to be high.

The poll contrasts the attitudes of the general Jewish population with the leadership of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, an umbrella organization of community relations councils, and with the non-Jewish public.

The survey finds a large gap in attitudes between the general Jewish population and the leadership of the JCPA, long seen as a staunchly liberal group.

On prayer at sporting events, for example, only 5 percent of JCPA leaders support it, compared with 28 percent of the Jewish public.

While some see nothing unusual about the gap -- leaders often advocate a more extreme position than followers -- others see the chasm as an indication that JCPA is out of sync with the American Jews they seek to represent.

The differences among Jews, however, are minor when compared with the sample of non-Jews. In almost every instance, both the Jewish public and JCPA leaders are significantly more "separationist" than non-Jews.

The study used a sample of 1,002 Jews, 684 non-Jews and 111 JCPA leaders. The margin of error was 3 to 4 percent for the Jews and non-Jews, but no statistic is available for the JCPA group.

The study is part of a larger project, "Jews and the American Public Square," being conducted the Philadelphia-based Center for Jewish Community Studies.

The Pew Charitable Trusts is funding the project.

It comes at a time when religion is playing an unprecedented role in mainstream political campaigns and is informing much of the debate on such public policy issues as school vouchers and abortion.

"American attitudes toward religion and public life are changing, and old ways of thinking may not be up to the challenge of understanding and responding to new situations," according to a pamphlet describing the project.

While the "high wall of separation" that Jews have staunchly advocated has served them well, the pamphlet says, "it has also framed the way they understand -- and misunderstand -- the role of religion in America." The purpose of the project, its organizers say, is to "open up a wide-ranging conversation" since the need for new perspectives is "urgent." So where do Jews and the JCPA leadership stand when it comes to church-state separation issues such as posting the Ten Commandments in schools and placing manger scenes on government property? Among the key findings:

Thirty-eight percent of Jews think it's OK to allow public schools to display the Ten Commandments, in contrast to 5 percent of JCPA leaders and 65 percent of non-Jews.

Forty-three percent of Jews think a city government should be allowed to put up a manger scene on government property at Christmas. Five percent of JCPA leaders agree, as do 80 percent of non-Jews.

Twenty-eight percent of Jews think there should be more laws governing moral behavior. Three percent of JCPA leadership agree, as do 45 percent of non-Jews.

Thirty percent of the Jewish public say it is pleasing when political leaders publicly affirm their belief in God. Twenty-two percent of JCPA leaders and 70 percent of non-Jews agree with this statement.

Thirty-five percent of Jews think members of the clergy can discuss political candidates or issues from the pulpit, in contrast to 73 percent of JCPA leaders and 30 percent of non-Jews.

The gap between the JCPA leadership and the Jewish public may mean a number of things.

Leaders often tend to be more extreme than the public they are said to represent, according to Steven Cohen, a professor of sociology at Hebrew University professor and the author of the study.

Marc Stern, counsel for the American Jewish Congress and an expert on the separation of church and state, said the Jewish public is willing to accept the "symbolic notation" of religious accommodation -- such as teaching Christmas carols in public schools along with Chanukah songs (56 percent in favor) or putting up a manger scene on government property (43 percent), especially if they don't feel threatened by it.

In contrast, the JCPA leadership -- 13 percent on the Christmas carols and 5 percent on the manger scene -- is more committed to applying the separation principal in all public arenas, Stern said.

But when it comes to legislative initiatives, fewer Jews among both the public and JCPA believe there should be more laws governing moral behavior, more religion in government or government aid to schools.

The study also found that JCPA leaders are more religious on a personal level than the general Jewish public and also are more supportive of religious involvement in public policy dialogue.

Cohen sees this as a paradox that can be explained by the leadership's strong ideological facility to reconcile separationism with strong Jewish commitments and the understanding of the agency's historically liberal position on separation of church and state.

This ability to separate public policy from private behavior allows the JCPA leaders to "adopt the logic that connects support for religious involvement in public life with separationism in church-state policy," the study says. For JCPA's associate executive vice-chair, Martin Raffel, there is no paradox.

In fact, he said, the finding "explodes the myth" that separationists are opposed to religion.

"Support for church-state separation does not equal opposition to religion," Raffel said.

The staunch support of separation of church and state, he said, stems from the assessment of JCPA leaders who have gone into public schools, for example, and witnessed the negative consequences of religion in the schools.


Back to Home Page