Presidential Oaths with the Bible: Should There Be Two Bibles in Troubled Times?

The inauguration of Barack Obama is nigh at the time this article is being written, but undoubtedly a lot of his opponents (as well as supporters) will be paying attention to how he recites the oath of office. And they'll all be looking to see how he places his hand on the bible--or whether he'll start a refreshingly new Presidency by doing something different with said bible. If you go by three former Presidents during the 20^th century, it could be two bibles. When you see the names of those Presidents, it isn't any wonder why they used a bible x 2, along with one President kissing his oath bible.

Then there's the puzzlement and debate over why most Presidents before FDR weren't confirmed to even use a bible during the most important oath in the world...other than a prayer itself.

It was Dwight D. Eisenhower who perhaps felt that he was heading into a time in history when America was at its most important crossroads. In a diffuse sense of history, Eisenhower considering his Presidency a crossroads during the complacent 1950's might seem odd to those who look at that time period as overly comfortable. But consider we had just ended WWII, were at the beginnings of the cold war and were still in the Korean Conflict when Eisenhower was elected. By the time Eisenhower was re-elected in 1956, things were much more comfortable and set the pattern for the 50's as we know it now. But his first inauguration had him requesting two bibles for the oath of office.

Historians might argue that Eisenhower merely did that because he was more or less forced into the Presidency by a huge mandate. He knew the heavy responsibility of the Presidency and that you needed a strong spiritual foundation in order to survive the stress. Whether just symbolic or a personal preference by Eisenhower in thinking that two bibles would incite a stronger aura of spiritual guidance (something Christians might say isn't necessarily necessary), the President before Eisenhower was the one who set the tone for not only using two bibles but also kissing it.

In a lot of ways, Harry S. Truman was in a similar boat to Barack Obama, even though nothing can really compare to what Obama is inheriting in the way of domestic and world debacles. Nevertheless, Truman inherited the trouble of ending WWII when taking the oath after Franklin Roosevelt died of a brain hemorrhage in April 1945. Truman knew that inheriting a war sometimes means taking drastic measures to end it--with the blood on the hands of the President. No wonder then that Truman took it upon himself to utter his oath on two bibles for the first time in Presidential history. He then promptly kissed the bible. And he did it again at his inaugural when actually elected three and a half years later in 1948.

The kissing of the bible was something considered, at the time, to be quite archaic and something rumored to have been done by George Washington. Truman, though, was an archaic (yet still quaintly modern) type of guy who was only reflecting how he really felt about the situation he was in. His time in office was one of profound stress and likely guilt over dropping the bombs on Japan in August 1945. That, despite Truman seeming to not bat an eye over any decision he made. There isn't a doubt, however, that he had a strong (yet private) spiritual side in order to cope with the job.

So who was the last President to take the oath on two bibles? Believe it or not, it was Richard Nixon. Yeah, it probably seems moot to even mention him doing that when he obviously didn't live up to the principles (at least politically) inside those two books. We all know now, of course, that Nixon seemed to divide up everything into acceptable and unacceptable brackets. In the world of the Presidency, you were above everything, so he thought. In your private life, then you can live a life that's worthy of being considered Christian.

I've written here recently speculating on the omnipotence of the Presidency in the mind of Barack Obama. While I suspect his feet are planted firmly on the ground, the spiritual symbolism he embeds into the public consciousness during his inaugural oath might make a big difference in how he's perceived...

____

If you're reading this a long time after the inauguration, then it's likely you saw Obama at least take the oath with one bible--and, as we know, one used by Lincoln during his inauguration in 1861. But should there be a requirement that when times are extra tough, a President must take the oath with two bibles or perhaps kiss it? Since there's a long record now of using just one bible and doing nothing more, chances are Obama did the same thing. Today, it'd be considered egregious to do what John Quincy Adams did and be sworn in to office on a law book instead of the bible. Nobody raised any objections when that happened in 1825, mainly because the separation of church and state were more carefully delineated then.

Once the phrase "So help me God" became fashionable during Presidential oaths via, surprisingly, FDR (another President inheriting a mountain of problems), Presidents no longer had to worry about the controversies uttering the phrase. It's unfortunate that Abraham Lincoln had to face criticism during his inauguration because he didn't use "So help me God" after being told by Christian groups that he should. What people don't know is that he gave hints later that he had a strong spiritual foundation not worn on his sleeve. Considering the war Lincoln inherited, it shouldn't be surprising.

No matter what Obama will do, we'll assume he'll be the same way his idol Lincoln was. Obama has already made it perfectly clear that he's Christian, yet prefers to keep it in his mind rather than making it obvious. Many other people are similar, and perhaps we should let a President keep it that way--no matter how by-the-book his or her oath is via putting his or her hand on the good book...

Sources:

http://fpc.state.gov/fpc/40871.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office_of_the_President_of_the_United_States#cite_note-12