Good Lord. Some Polish Parliamentarians want to make Jesus Christ the honorary King of Poland. To its credit, the Catholic Church hasn’t supported the measure, which looks likely to fail. This story, though, notes that the Virgin Mary was named the honorary Queen of Poland in the 1600s, so at least there’s precedent.
I fully expect this move to hit our shores. They’re running out of states where they can put gay marriage bans on the ballots, so the religious right will have to find some other issue to drive turnout. And what better than, say, a law naming Jesus as the honorary Governor of Georgia? It could work at all levels — Jesus for honorary School Board Chairman, honorary District 3 Water & Sewer Board Representative, etc. Shucks, George Bush would vote for Jesus as honorary Chair of the Philosophy Department.
Okay, so some of that is an exaggeration. But I seriously do expect some legislator somewhere to think this is a humdinger of an idea. Why not? It looks good on campaign literature, makes for easy “My opponent voted against Jesus for Governor” attack ads, and makes a pretty firm statement to one’s base. Once some enterprising theocratist has this brainstorm, I expect lots of imitators to follow suit, and I’m sure Roy Moore will be mad he didn’t think of it first. (Actually, Moore strikes me as more into the Old Testament God, rather than the New Testamant Jesus, but I suspect he’d still rather have Jesus as Governor of Alabama instead of Bob Riley.)
Here’s a thought experiment. Let’s assume the following scenario: A state legislature names Jesus the state’s honorary Governor. And let’s assume that this happens in a state where that kind of declaration isn’t specifically prohibited, or is at least a plausible reading of the legislature’s powers regarding appointments in the executive branch. (I’ll assume a statute could create the position and simultaneously fill it if need be.) The law explicitly says that the position is an honorary one only, and carries no power, salary, budget, veto power, staff, etc. At most, the state makes a few references to the post in official documents and slaps the title on some highway signs. Is it still an unconstitutional establishment of religion?
I think it would be, at least under the “endorsement” test. But that got me wondering about the awarding of the Congressional Gold Medal of Honor or the Presidential Medal of Freedom to religious figures. Why are those okay? What if a state decided to award “Honorary Governorship Medals” to figures it thought were deserving, and named as honorary Co-Governors Jesus Christ and Ronald Reagan (so that it wasn’t wholly religious)? What if it gave the awards to Jesus, Mother Teresa, and Billy Graham (the latter two have actually received the Congressional and Presidential awards)? What if it gave them to Jesus, Mohammad, and Abraham?
Hm. This all started as kind of a jokey post about some Polish delegates’ misplaced legislative priorities. But now I’m really thinking about the Congressional and Presidential honoraria. If Congress can give a Gold Medal to the Pope, why can’t a state save a seat in the Governor’s Mansion for Jesus Christ?