I also refer briefly to Hughes' political activity in my The Bible, the
School and the Constitution (OUP, 2012).
--
Steven K. Green, J.D., Ph.D.
Fred H. Paulus Professor of Law and Director
Center for Religion, Law and Democracy
Willamette University
900 State St., S.E.
Salem, Oregon 97301
503-370-6732
On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 5:23 AM, Marc Stern <ste...@ajc.org> wrote:
> The story is well told in Diane ravitch's The Great School Wars
>
> Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Verizon Wireless 4G LTE
> network.
> Original Message
> From: Graber, Mark
> Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2014 7:51 AM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Reply To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Subject: RE: Bishop John Hughes, Protestant Public Schools in New York,
> and Political Activity by Clergy
>
>
> For those interested in the actual debates, the sacred Gillman, Graber,
> Whittington, Volume II has excerpts from John Hughes call for public
> support for Catholic Schools and the Episcopal response. Pages 230-34. I
> probably can send people a word version if interested.
> ________________________________________
> From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [
> religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] on behalf of Saperstein, David [
> dsaperst...@rac.org]
> Sent: Thursday, December 25, 2014 7:27 AM
> To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> Subject: Re: Bishop John Hughes, Protestant Public Schools in New York,
> and Political Activity by Clergy
>
> Paul and Mark's posts raise fascinating historical insights. As some of
> you know, I have been working on a book for a while on the use of religion
> in American elections, so any interesting historical examples you come
> across like this, I would greatly appreciate being sent .
>
> But as to the debate over clergy involvement on "political" issues , the
> posts appear to conflate religious institutional involvement in partisan
> electoral "political activity" (which according to the IRS/FEC rules cannot
> be done at all --except in a purely personal capacity by clergy--and no tax
> exempt money could be used for) and Paul's reference to "speak out on
> public issues" type "political activity," which, as Paul and everyone on
> the list knows, can be done with tax exempt money, with the obvious
> substantiality or 501h limitations as to lobbying.
>
> Since these rules did not exist in Archbishop Hughes' day, I would think ,
> Mark , that his model, or that of the political practices of other
> religious groups at that time, is of great historical public policy
> interest but (with few or any on point court decisions from that era), not
> really relevant to the debates we face today on e.g. candidate endorsements
> from the pulpit with no IRS/FEC restrictions.
>
> As to Marty Lederman's query to Mark ("who opposes clergy political
> activity?"), that this latter example is the kind of "political activity"
> some (many?) on this list "oppose" to which Mark's challenge is addressed.
> But Mark can certainly clarify for himself.
>
> Best wishes for a joyful and meaningful Christmas to all who celebrate it.
>
> David
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Dec 24, 2014, at 7:19 PM, "Finkelman, Paul" <
> paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu> wrote:
> >
> > I have written a bit about this in my biography of Millard Fillmore
> --who was totally insensitive to issues involving Catholics, Jews, and
> blacks -- a sort of equal opportunity bigot.
> >
> > If was state wide, not just NYC. Fillmore lost the NY Gov. race in
> 1844 in part over this issue -- to the extent that he alienated almost all
> Catholic voters in the state. The issue may have affected the presidential
> race as well, since Clay lots NY State to Polk by about 5,000 votes.
> >
> > The issue is in part that the school day began with a prayer and a Bible
> reading, and the prayer was Protestant (usually the Protestant Lord's
> Prayer, not to be confused with the Catholic Lord's Prayer), followed by
> Bible reading from the King James Bible -- which was also both Protestant
> and in places translated to be anti-Catholic.
> >
> > Almost all of the teachers were Protestant in a pre-Civil Service world.
> >
> > I am not sure what the curriculum was, but there was certainly a sense
> among Catholics that the schools were hostile to their faith. It was
> doubtless tied up up in British vs. Irish ethnic hostility as well
> (although were there a minority of German Catholics as well, but most of
> the political conflict was over the Irish). It helped set the stage for
> various anti-Catholic and anti-Immigrant parties, most famously the Know
> Nothings, but there were others before that one. (For what it is worth,
> Millard Fillmore ran for president in 1856 on the Know Nothing ticket, with
> a party platform provision against Catholics ever holding office in the US).
> >
> > While the Irish generally voted for Democrats, some Whigs -- like
> William Henry Seward -- supported their position,, not merely to get
> Catholic votes but because he saw the bigotry in the issue.
> >
> > Mark, I am not sure what you mean by "oppose clergy political
> activity." I oppose religious bodies using their tax exempt status for
> political purposes. I think that is wrong and probably illegal.
> >
> > I think all Americans should be politically active, and that includes
> the Clergy. I think members of the Clergy should speak out -- as citizens
> -- on public issues, as long as they are not doing it on tax exempt money.
> The easy way is to create organizations that are not religious but are
> supportive of religious goals, to support political issues.
> >
> > I am pretty sure the Catholic Church, for example, did not fund Father
> Robert Drinan's successful campaigns for Congress. There are number of
> members of Congress now (or in the recent past) who are members of the
> clergy. Surely that is not a problem as long as their campaigns are not
> funded by tax-deductible contributions to their church.
> >
> > Obviously this analysis is anachronistic and perhaps irrelevant for the
> mid-19th century. In that period members of the clergy were deeply
> involved in political issues, although not (as far as I know) ever telling
> their flock how to vote or arguing that politicians should be denied
> communion based on their political position. The most obvious example of
> political/religious debate was over slavery; where three church split into
> southern and northern branches and thousands of ministers gave sermons for
> or against slavery. The southern churches funded books and essay contests
> to prove that the Bible supported slavery. My favorite book title of the
> period is "The Duties of a Christian Master," which was not (as some might
> think today) to free his slaves!
> >
> >
> >
> > *************************************************
> > Paul Finkelman
> > Senior Fellow
> > Penn Program on Democracy, Citizenship, and Constitutionalism
> > University of Pennsylvania
> > and
> > Scholar-in-Residence
> > National Constitution Center
> > Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
> >
> > 518-439-7296 (p)
> > 518-605-0296 (c)
> >
> > paul.finkel...@albanylaw.edu
> > www.paulfinkelman.com
> > *************************************************
> >
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu [
> religionlaw-boun...@lists.ucla.edu] on behalf of Scarberry, Mark [
> mark.scarbe...@pepperdine.edu]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 6:21 PM
> > To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
> > Subject: Bishop John Hughes, Protestant Public Schools in New York, and
> Political Activity by Clergy
> >
> > It seems that Bishop John Hughes in New York endorsed political
> candidates. Apparently he opposed public funding of schools that taught
> Protestantism unless funds were also provided for Catholic schools, as he
> requested. When the request was denied, he endorsed political candidates
> who took steps to remove religion from NY public schools (New York City, I
> think, rather than New York State, but I could be wrong). My sense is that
> New York public schools (perhaps in NY City or perhaps just elsewhere in
> the state) continued to (or eventually later began again to) promulgate
> Protestantism, at least of a sort.
> >
> > I'd be interested in hearing from list members who oppose clergy
> political activity what they think about this example.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > Mark S. Scarberry
> > Professor of Law
> > Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
> >
> > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
> > _______________________________________________
> > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
> > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
> >
> > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
>
> Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as
> private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are
> posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or
> wrongly) forward the messages to others.
>
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the
messages to others.
