Quotes from Hebrew and Christian Bible in US War Documents

    The Chicago Tribune reported today (Memorial Day, Monday, May 25, 2009) on the use of biblical quotations in American intelligence reports ( "Use of Scripture linked to war documents troubles Jewish, Christian leaders," see here).  The article, by Manya A. Brachear, echoes an Associated Press piece in the Los Angeles Times , "Pentagon cuts daily Bible quote," that appeared on May 19, 2009 , see here. 
    In today's piece, Manya Brachear quotes from two Chicago-based of Christian theologians, Dr. Marc Gopin (representing a Jewish voice) of George Mason University, and a Chicago-based Muslim leader.  Each respondent opposes the use of biblical verses, all taken out of context, between 2001 and 2003.  Manya Brachear apparently did not find, or did not look, for any voice to speak positively about this practice.

    As embarrassing as it may seem, the use of biblical imagery has a famous pedigree in American public discourse.  Consider the following passage from Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address (for the full text, see here).  I have highlighted the biblical passages in quotation marks:

Both [the Union and the Confederacy -- ed. ] read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."

    Perhaps Lincoln, being a hero, had the right to quote bible in public, while Bush and Rumsfeld, often seen as villains, had not the right to allow the bible to be quoted in intelligence reports that did not simultaneously see the light of day.
    Or, perhaps, the country has changed.  At one time, a president could comfortably quote from a book that was seen as part of the cultural fabric of his country.  Today, are we in a post-Christian America?  And, if so, is that patently a good thing?  Not in the eyes of this Jewish writer.