School Prayers and ‘Religious Warfare’

Last year the Supreme Court of the United States held that New York could not encourage recitation of the Regents’ Prayer in its schools. The decision was greeted by a great public outcry and was followed by the introduction of more than fifty proposals to amend the Constitution. These, in turn, inspired a statement in favor of the prayer decision submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee by 132 deans and professors of law and political science, a statement that concluded with these words: “The intrusion of religion upon the public school system both threatens the separation of church and state and challenges the traditional integrity of the public schools. That intrusion, if permitted, will greatly endanger the institutions which have preserved religious and political freedom in the United States and have prevented religious warfare in this nation. The decision of the Supreme Court in the Regents’ Prayer case has warded off that threat.”

If we may be permitted to indulge, for the moment, in the same hyperbole, we would say that the decision is more likely to promote religious warfare. At a minimum, it will thrust religion into the political arena, and whether the resulting discord will be serious depends on what the Court does in the cases spawned by the prayer decision; for, by ruling against the ill-advised religious enthusiasts in New York, the Court has inspired the ill-advised anti-religious enthusiasts around the country to mount one legal assault after another on whatever elements of religious establishment they can find, and there are many.

WB

About the Author

Walter Berns

Featured Tags

Last year the Supreme Court of the United States held that New York could not encourage recitation of the Regents’ Prayer in its schools. The decision was greeted by a great public outcry and was followed by the introduction of more than fifty proposals to amend the Constitution. These, in turn, inspired a statement in favor of the prayer decision submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee by 132 deans and professors of law and political science, a statement that concluded with these words: “The intrusion of religion upon the public school system both threatens the separation of church and state and challenges the traditional integrity of the public schools. That intrusion, if permitted, will greatly endanger the institutions which have preserved religious and political freedom in the United States and have prevented religious warfare in this nation. The decision of the Supreme Court in the Regents’ Prayer case has warded off that threat.”

If we may be permitted to indulge, for the moment, in the same hyperbole, we would say that the decision is more likely to promote religious warfare. At a minimum, it will thrust religion into the political arena, and whether the resulting discord will be serious depends on what the Court does in the cases spawned by the prayer decision; for, by ruling against the ill-advised religious enthusiasts in New York, the Court has inspired the ill-advised anti-religious enthusiasts around the country to mount one legal assault after another on whatever elements of religious establishment they can find, and there are many.