A “Monumental” Discussion about Sacred Texts

(Tina)Theresa Hannah-Munns

Copyright claimed 2006

In 2001, Judge Roy Moore of the Alabama state judiciary set up a square granite monument within the rotunda of the courthouse in Montgomery. Topped with the Ten Commandments written on two stone slabs, this icon facsimilates the image and narrative of Moses and the Ten Commandments from biblical stories and places these cultural memories into contemporary settings.[1] With these stone writings on top, the four sides of the monument below are inscribed with secular-historical “Christian” writings from objective legal documents as well as sayings from leading American forefathers, as if these are the continued historical documents of the Exodus. In the physical presence of this Christian authoritative icon, national icons are mentioned, such as the pledge of allegiance to the flag[2] that creates a “monumental” sacred text of white male privilege.[3] This “crèche strategy”[4] creates, through artistic translation, a specific interpretation of various religious and secular texts by the artist and funders of the instillation involved. This is then translated through the position of the documents on the one sculpture, as well as brought together in the context of the viewer’s position in time and space, and maintains a specific Christian-legalistic worldview.

Jacob Neusner defines sacred text as “authoritative teachings”[5] which is certainly the definition used within the representation of this crèche of writings etched in granite. As a sacred text, this monument becomes an image for contemporary and future Americans that “symbolically constitute the very image of moral stability for which we all yearn.”[6] Each of the components belongs to various different and diverse institutional frameworks, that of secular history and song, state and national law, biblical texts and the like. In this monument the whole is not the sum of its parts but greater than its summations and this canon forwards social control of a specific worldview interpreted by a small elite group through the use of state authority.[7]

As a canon, this monument closes the door to cultural and religious pluralism and subjects all populations to the social control of the interpretation of “one god” (the Christian God) of the mainstream (white) population with its ownership and entitlement to “our pledge,” “our people,” “our government” of the “One nation, under God, indivisible.”[8] The conquest values that appropriated land is now appropriating the psychological and social landscapes of humanity. The ideological preferences of this elite group are forwarded, such as “security for property, for reputation,” and preserved over and above the more global value “for life.”[9] Rupert Ross, an Indigenous scholar who researched the miscommunication between mainstream legal institutions and indigenous justice systems, recognizes this global value as more of a prescriptive value of oral cultures, with

traditional law focused primarily upon teaching what people should do as human members of the cycle of life, rather than on creating lists of what they shouldn’t do, followed by complex proofs and punishment… such ‘list making’ seems to have been secondary to ‘lesson making.’[10]

While the indigenous populations had overall been relocated and/or extinguished in the geographical landscape of this debate, this quote shows how the structure of written lists of commandments are valued by the mainstream over other more preventative ideological endeavours preferred by some of the marginalized populations in the Americas. The genres used in writing, especially those within the legal, secular, and religious institutions of the mainstream, do not include the oral nature or frameworks that network a more relational holism to the activities involved within the courtroom setting. It is this setting that tends to regulate and incarcerate individuals from these minority cultures based on values that are not as globally shared as the mainstream presupposes.

Returning back to cultural demographics, or more honestly those of ethnicity, Alabama’s citizens include a 71.4% white population, 26.4% black population, and the remainder consisting of American Indian (0.5%), central and south Hispanic, and a small Asian population.[11] Unfortunately, these ethnic distinctions are not statistically broken down into religious demographics to show how much of the population is Christian versus the populations that ascribe to the plurality of religions available in the contemporary world. It would be easy to reach the verdict that the large percent of white and black populations probably ascribe to Christian forms of religion, but this would exclude the more eclectic practices of religious pluralism, as seen within the widespread new religious movements that flourish within the United States along with the large faith populations in world religions such as Buddhism, Islam and Eastern philosophical frameworks. An American Indian may interpret the presence of the monument as a sacred text that is an icon representing the white’s conquest over her/his land and people, especially with the commandments of “Thou shall not steal” and even “Thou shall not murder.”[12] Viewing the national anthem printed out in granite, an indigenous person may read the appropriation of land and the “conquer we must, when our cause is just” as representative of the legal system to which s/he is attending to by entering the building and as another sign of perpetual oppression in a fourth world situation. Rather than “justice” the legal system is another conquering agent that promotes hopelessness to those receiving the legal judgments.

Another component in the relational history between white America and the minority factions is the historical institution of slavery in the recent past. A black person, whether Christian or not, may sing the national anthem, but upon seeing the words carved in stone may recognize the move from slavery to outright institutional oppression, with black people, another large population incarcerated, as “the objects” that must be suppressed so that white people can receive “the safety and happiness of society,” as quoted from James Madison’s writing included on the monument.[13]

With the legally-sanctioned removal of the monument to a back room within the same building in 2003,[14] the debate is not over but has turned into what has come to be known as the “Hang Ten” movement.[15] Interestingly, the debate around this specific monument has been called the “Roy Moore’s Ten Commandments Battle.”[16] Moses is removed from the ideological image of the tablets and Roy Moore as a contemporary Christian warrior is installed in his place, perpetuating the Christian missionary vision into the courtroom.

Foundational to this debate is the polarity between secularism and religion. While theoretically assigned, the dividing line between these two constructs was never more than a thin veil of categorization. These notions perpetuated Christian values and philosophical paradigms of colonial rights, again based on notions of domination divinely installed in one of the bible’s creation stories. Notions such as these have become overt and are refuted within the debate of the use of written religious texts shown alongside the American secular produced nationalistic canons that make secondary reference to biblical precepts. In one way, the closed Christian canonization process has been reopened in American nationalism, adding the words of legislation and of the national forefathers as section three, after the old and new testament sections.

It is interesting how the list of Ten Commandments is the most commonly known form which most English speakers recognize as authoritative, but do not know that this list is simply a summation of the longer entries within Exodus 20:1-17. This summation takes the commandments out of their written context within the pages of the bible and sets these within a codified framework most easily consumed by contemporary purchasers, as seen in the marketable products available by the foundation set up by and for Roy Moore, now removed from his judicial role.[17] This ‘10 Commandments’ list forwards a protestant interpretation through the scriptural preference of the Exodus 20 version over the Deuteronomy version of the Catholic faith, or the Exodus 34 version of the Jewish faith.[18] This list, “etched in stone”[19] becomes the sacred text that is “felt to have a power and profundity which allows it to speak of matters other than its clear, or surface, meaning.”[20] It is from a deeper level of meaning, one grounded in a Christian interpretation, “that traditional commentators may draw on to prove points apparently contrary to the primary meaning,”[21] such as those pointed out by minority scholars like Rupert Ross. A monument such as this creates an open canon of more traditional religious formulations, only to close it by establishing it within an authoritative social setting in order for contemporary judicial members to become the secularized “priests” that are able to reinterpret it and obtain social control, not so much for contemporary citizens, but as an icon that is “created for descendents … projected on to their sublime and distant horizon.”[22]

Notes

---

[1] William Odom, webmaster. (2006). “Alabama’s Ten Commandments Monument,” Re-taking America: America’s Christian Heritage. www.retakingamerica.com/ten_commandments_001.html Last viewed December 12, 2006.

[2] Ibid.

[3] I add male here because the secularized writings on the monument include gender-specific language, as seen within the etched quote of William Blackstone and the National Anthem. Ibid.

[4] Derek H. Davis. (2002). “The Ten Commandments as Public Ritual. (Editorial),” Journal of Church and State 44.2: IV.

[5] Jacob Neusner, ed. (1998). Sacred Texts and Authority. Cleveland: Pilgrim, vii.

[6] David H. Aaron. (2006). Etched in Stone: The Emergence of the Decalogue. New York: T & T Clarke, 326.

[7] M.B. ter Borg. (1998). “Canon and Social Control,” Canonization and Decanonization, ed. By A. Van der Kooij & K. Van der Toorn. Leiden: Brill; 414-415.

[8] These are examples of various secular scripts found on the monument. See Odom.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Rupert Ross. (1996). Returning to the Teachings: Exploring Aboriginal Justice. New York: Penguin, 258.

[11] US Census Bureau. (2006). US Census Bureau State & Country Quickfacts. http://quickfacts.census.gov Last revised June 8, 2006: Last viewed December 12, 2006.

[12] See picture in Odom.

[13] Ibid.

[14] Foundation for Moral Law. (2006). Foundation for Moral Law: Defending our Inalienable Right to Publicly Acknowledge God. www.morallaw.org/index.html Last updated November, 2006: Last viewed December 12, 2006.

[15] Davis, I (221).

[16] Foundation for Moral Law.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Davis, II.

[19] Aaron, 326.

[20] Roger J. Corless. (1979). “Sacred Text, Context, and Proof-Text,” The Critical Study of Sacred Texts, ed. Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty. Berkley: Berkeley Religious Studies Series, 258.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Aaron, 326.

Bibliography

Aaron, David H. (2006). Etched in Stone: The Emergence of the Decalogue. New York: T & T Clarke.

Borg, M.B. ter. (1998). “Canon and Social Control,” Canonization and Decanonization, ed. By A. Van der Kooij & K. Van der Toorn. Leiden: Brill; 411-423.

Corless, Roger J. (1979). “Sacred Text, Context, and Proof-Text,” The Critical Study of Sacred Texts, ed. Wendy Doniger O’Flaherty. Berkley: Berkeley Religious Studies Series, 257-270.

Davis, Derek H. (2002). “The Ten Commandments as Public Ritual. (Editorial),” Journal of Church and State 44.2: 221-228.

Odom, William, webmaster. (2006). “Alabama’s Ten Commandments Monument,” Re-taking America: America’s Christian Heritage. www.retakingamerica.com/ten_commandments_001.html Last viewed December 12, 2006.

Foundation for Moral Law. (2006). Foundation for Moral Law: Defending our Inalienable Right to Publicly Acknowledge God. www.morallaw.org/index.html Last updated November, 2006: Last viewed December 12, 2006.

Neusner, Jacob, ed. (1998). Sacred Texts and Authority. Cleveland: Pilgrim.

Ross, Rupert. (1996). Returning to the Teachings: Exploring Aboriginal Justice. New York: Penguin.

US Census Bureau. (2006). US Census Bureau State & Country Quickfacts. http://quickfacts.census.gov Last revised June 8, 2006: Last viewed December 12, 2006.