Congressional Chaplaincy?

While reading this post, Ratio Primoris (Reason Foremost): Religion In A Secular Society, I had a few thoughts about Chaplaincies in general and the one for Congress in particular. I think there are some reasons to have chaplains in some situations, but for Congress there seems to be no good reason for it.

First, why do people need chaplains. Many people are religious and they feel that religion serves an important service in their lives. It is possible that certain situations might take them away from the spiritual care that they feel a need for on a regular basis. This is why hospitals and the military both have chaplains. Serious illness or military service could easily put you in a situation where you would not have access to spiritual care at a time when you most strongly felt the need for it.

Now, let's examine the business of Congress. Is this likely to produce a similar situation? Serving in the legislature is not generally life threatening. Nor does it take you to a part of the world where you would have poor access to clergy of your chosen faith. So why not just let members of Congress pray as they wish and go to whichever houses of worship they see fit to attend? What is the need to have an officially designated pastor for Congress? I can think of only one reason: to show their constituents that they are religious.

But is that something any of us, whether religious or not, should find admirable? I would think that Christians would see this as akin to the action of the Pharisee who publicly thanked God that he was not like the sinner. They're putting on a show, and shame of all shames, the public buys it.

Perhaps you think there is some other explanation. Consider this: most employers do not choose to hire chaplains. It seems that in the private sector your boss is likely to leave it to you to seek or not seek spiritual care in accordance with your preference. This chaplaincy does not serve the purpose of providing spiritual care to the congressmen, if that were the purpose, then they could simply leave this to the individual members as they do in the private sector. The reason why they need a chaplain more than people in other occupations is that this supposedly shows that they are religious. Despite having differing religious beliefs that would be better served at various houses of worship that members of Congress choose for themselves, they have a common need to show the public that they are religious. That's not something we should admire, especially when this display of religiosity is done at public expense.