If you’re not already aware of it, it may come as something of a shock to learn that Congress employs two congressional chaplains. Both positions pay very handsome full-time salaries with the Senate chaplain making $150,000 and the House chaplain raking in $172,500, just slightly less than a congressional member’s salary. When these salaries are added to the budget for each of their offices, the bill to taxpayers is a cool $1 million per year. It is not money well spent. The functions of the chaplains’ offices have long been redundant; they do not provide any services otherwise unavailable to Congressional members, and taxpayers derive no benefit from this expenditure whatsoever. In short, congressional chaplains are a luxury that taxpayers should no longer indulge.
From the beginning, congressional chaplaincy was inconsistent with the constitutionally-established separation of church and state. As James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution”, wrote in Detatched Memoranda:
The Constitution of the U. S. forbids everything like an establishment of a national religion. The law appointing Chaplains establishes a religious worship for the national representatives, to be performed by Ministers of religion, elected by a majority of them; and these are to be paid out of the national taxes. Does not this involve the principle of a national establishment, applicable to a provision for a religious worship for the Constituent as well as of the representative Body, approved by the majority, and conducted by Ministers of religion paid by the entire nation.
In those early days of the newly independent America, it can be argued that there was a case for having on-site spiritual advisers for members far removed from their homes and who could not easily communicate with their own personal religious mentors. However, the invention of the telephone negated the validity of that argument well over a hundred years ago. Nevertheless the practice has persisted because of, as SCOTUS determined in 1983, "history and tradition". So it's unconstitutional but it's always been around - that’s not much of a rationale when stacked up against the Establishment Clause. Additionally, it has no validity as a general principle. For example, starvation among the poor has always been around - it's far more historical than congressional chaplaincy - but no-one in their right mind would support ensuring the poor continue to starve because of "history and tradition". Beyond its unconstitutionality, there are also other reasons for abandoning the institution. As Madison noted:
The establishment of the chaplainship to Congress is a palpable violation of equal rights, as well as of Constitutional principles: The tenets of the chaplains elected [by the majority] shut the door of worship against the members whose creeds & consciences forbid a participation in that of the majority. To say nothing of other sects, this is the case with that of Roman Catholics & Quakers who have always had members in one or both of the Legislative branches. Could a Catholic clergyman ever hope to be appointed a Chaplain? To say that his religious principles are obnoxious or that his sect is small, is to lift the evil at once and exhibit in its naked deformity the doctrine that religious truth is to be tested by numbers, or that the major sects have a right to govern the minor.
Since Madison’s time it hasn’t been much more diverse though there have been Catholic chaplains – the grand total of two of them. The first was appointed in 1832 (Senate chaplain) and the second in 2000 (House chaplain). However, there has never been a Jewish chaplain, nor Hindu nor Islamic nor Buddhist. Regardless of the fact that denominations have varied, in every instance it has always been Christianity on duty at the Capitol and that is just a little too uncomfortably like an ongoing demonstration of religious belief by the national government. What’s more, it is religious belief imposed by a majority over a minority which thereafter is not represented. That grates harshly against the freedom enshrined in the Establishment Clause. The position of chaplain is also wholly paternalistic. Never once has a female chaplain been appointed. That this should be the case 96 years after American women won the right to vote, is appalling. It isn’t in and of itself an argument against the chaplaincy but it does give weight to the charge of anachronism when the institution fails to reflect hard-won gender equality in the present day. Madison was also concerned with yet another inequality in the institution:
If Religion consist in voluntary acts of individuals, singly, or voluntarily associated, and it be proper that public functionaries, as well as their Constituents sh[oul]d discharge their religious duties, let them like their Constituents, do so at their own expence.
Why should the people pay for the religious worship and spiritual advisory service for Congressional members? In this day and age there is just no moral or financial case for it. As Chris Weigant points out in his article Cut Congressional Chaplains:
All of the duties of the congressional chaplains could be easily carried out by either other congressional custodial staff (scheduling volunteer chaplains for opening prayers, for instance), or by volunteer faith leaders who are eager and willing to provide prayers to Congress, for free. Any congressperson needing further spiritual guidance can either pick up the phone, or do a quick web search for the closest house of worship of their choice to the Capitol.
Exactly. The duties of the million dollar chaplains could – and should – be undertaken by voluntary, honorary chaplains of both genders and representing the full gamut of faiths. It would be an education for most members and one which they sorely need. As for spiritual guidance, Congress is in greater need of a qualified therapist given the depressing number of batshit crazy members occupying seats in both chambers. Since it would be a part-time position (in line with the members’ scheduled work days), it would cost a tenth of the current chaplaincy budget. Thus $1 million a year (or $900,000 if you go the much-needed therapist route) of federal funding can, and should, be saved while Congressional members get to demonstrate good faith in the Establishment Clause of the US Constitution which they’ve sworn an oath to uphold. It would be doing the whole nation a favor.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~***~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* Header image is a photo of the Congressional Prayer Room in the Capitol Building