This Fourth of July Weekend: No Separation Between Temple and State

Buddhist Temple on the National Mall:

So, it seems there is to be no wall of separation between temple and state. Only between the church and state.

Now I must say that I am not upset that the United States has allowed a Buddhist Temple to be built in the middle of the National Mall. It was placed there for the Smithsonian Folklife Festival. Bhutan is highlighted this year, and the temple has a rightful place in the festival, because it demonstrates a core aspect of Bhutanese life. And as one who studies Buddhism and one who thinks that Christians and Buddhists can learn much from each other in inter-religious dialogues, I welcome the kind of opportunity this will allow for such dialogue to take place.[1]

But I hope that this means that other nations, such as the Vatican, would be welcomed to present their own cultural heritage at the Folklife Festival in the future. And if they are, that they would be free to construct, as need be, religious buildings to suit their own cultural needs. Otherwise, I fear a double-standard is being allowed here: some religions are welcomed by the state (and, I assume given financial support), while others (especially Christianity), are not given such respect.

I am in total agreement with the notion of religious liberty. The state should not coerce people to follow a specific religious tradition. And the state must allow all religious traditions as much freedom as is acceptable in a well ordered society (so, of course, no human sacrifices are allowed). However, I have never understood why this means there can be no public celebration of religion by a state, if done in a proper fashion. Indeed, I would argue that it is now being done on the National Mall. It’s a very good thing, and I am glad I went to see it for myself.  I just wish that this kind of opportunity given to the Buddhists would be given to one and all. 

[1] Many important Catholic and Orthodox theologians and leaders agree with my sentiment on Buddhist-Christian dialogue, as can be ascertained, for example, from the writings of Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, Henri de Lubac, Hans Urs von Balthasar, Thomas Hopko, and John Garvey. Of course, it is always important to note that such dialogue must not be syncretistic.