The God Memorial

President Johnson proposed today that all of America's religious faiths join in erecting in Washington "a fitting memorial to the God who made us all." (UPI, Feb. 5, 1964)

In the 70 days of Johnson's presidency he has turned frequently to prayer to help him bear the grave burdens of that high and difficult office. One feels, of course, a glow of quiet pride in the knowledge of our Chief Executive's devoutness. How onerous it would be to be denied the continuation of this White House tradition. Our thoughts wander back to that historic night in 1898, when William McKinley knelt in his office in reverent communion with the Lord, before coming to the Mutual Decision to launch his courageous Spanish-American War. Johnson's proposal of a Monument is no more nor less than the fitting and logical culmination of Washington's long standing with the Divine.

After sounding our hearty aye to the President's suggestion, we advance below some possible source of contention, in hope of quick resolutions that will nip incipient opposition in the bud.

1. The concept of a "monument:" Webster's defines such an edifice as "a building, stone, pillar, or the like, erected in memory of the dead." Neitzche, you may remember, pronounced the Almighty's demise. Does Johnson concur? Some, for their own nefarious political purpose, may insinuate that he shares the philosopher's conviction. These ill-wishers may remind the voters of that compelling syllogism from Thus Spake Zarathustra: "If there were Gods, then how could I bear to be no God. Therefore, there are no Gods."

2. Size of Monument: It would be unfitting to erect a monument to God that is smaller than monuments already existing in Washington in recognition of mortals. Those honoring Lincoln and Washington, to cite two widely known examples, are rather large. A memorial grander than these could run into money.

3. Conflict of Religious Sects: Hopefully, Mr. Johnson's structure will be strictly nondenominational. Nevertheless, there are upwards of fifty significant sects in the United States holding somewhat heterogeneous concepts of Supreme Being. One trembles in the face of such diversity. Historically, it has given rise to knotty complications. Washington seems an improper site for a contemporary Tower of Babel.

4. Constitutionality of Monument: Would it violate the first amendment?

5. Design of monument: Already Washington is a potpourri of architectural styles. What form would God's Memorial assume? Let us not be penurious in undertaking such a sanctified construction. Perhaps a Golden Calf would be appropriate.

All considered, we are confident that the religious leaders of our country will find none of these pitfalls insurmountable. No scheme of any grandeur is devoid of kinks which must be worked out by sober, intelligent minds. Jehova's monument will demonstrate that the true image of America, reflected in its capital, is that of, in the words of our President, "a good and God-fearing people."