Is Prayer in School Unconstitutional?
Author: DavidJones // Category: Ethics, Politics, Pop Culture, The Church
Many people look back at the Supreme Court cases of Engel v. Vitale [1962] and Abington School District v. Schempp [1963] as landmark decisions. These rulings prohibited school-sanctioned prayer in public schools.
Since that time, many Christians have fought to get prayer back in public schools. Rallies have been held, senators have been petitioned, and lawsuits have been formed. However, the court cases have not been overturned.
Despite the efforts of many Christians to overturn this legislation, we must consider: Is Prayer in School Unconstitutional? I think the best answer I can give is: yes and no.
Contrary to what many people believe, it is NOT illegal to pray in a public school. Students have every right to pray over their meal, pray with friends, and even read their Bible in school.
However, it is illegal for a public school to sanction prayer. In other words, the principal cannot get up during an assembly and lead the school in prayer.
Many people have been upset about the removal of school-sanctioned prayer ever since the 1960s. However, is it possible that school-sanctioned prayer is unconstitutional? In my opinion, the answer is yes.
The First Amendment of the US Constitution established a principle of the separation of church and state. Many people do not know Thomas Jefferson established that principle to protect the church from the state. However, as time has gone by, its purpose has changed to protect the state from the church. In any regard, this very principle is the foundation for why school-sanctioned prayer was outlawed in public schools.
While that might have seemed horrific in the 1960s, we can now look at the Constitution and see that it was actually necessary in order to abide by our country’s foundation. Now some might say “But our country was founded on God. We have taken God out of public school!” In many regards those people are right. Those people, however, should also find some satisfaction in the Supreme Court decisions of 1962 and 1963.
Here’s why: Our country has turned away from God. We can no longer call ourselves a “Christian nation.” We are many things…but a Christian nation is not one of them! By the government removing school-sanctioned prayer from public schools, they actually saved many Christians future battles.
With the introduction and advancement of many new religions into the US since the 1960s, many people are teaching and promoting religions that contradict Christianity. If, in fact, school-sanctioned prayer was still lawful in 2008, what kind of prayers would schools be sponsoring?
If those laws never took effect, a Muslim principal would have every right to lead the school in a prayer to Allah. A Buddhist principal would have every right to lead the public school in a prayer to Buddha. Would Christians be upset at this? Yes and rightly so!
By declaring school-sanctioned prayer as unconstitutional, the Supreme Court actually prevented Christians from facing further legal battles.
To those who still believe they should fight for school-sanctioned prayer, let me say this: You will never change any hearts or convert people to Christianity by fighting legal battles. Yes, sometimes they are necessary to protect your rights. However, this battle will never change hearts. Individual hearts are changed by compassion, love, and lives of Christian integrity, not by forcing prayer on someone.
Take comfort in the fact that students still have the right to pray in school, and have the right to pray to the true living God.
Tags: Prayer in School, Unconstitutional
December 19th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
David – thank you! Enjoyed the read and the conversations we’ve had about such topics! Pusch
December 24th, 2008 at 9:35 am
What is the claim that Jefferson intended only to keep the state from the church based on?
In his letter to the Danbury Baptists in 1802, Jefferson wrote:
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.”
I know revisionists like David Barton attempt to argue that Jefferson intended only a “one-directional wall,” but I’ve never read anything that could serve as legitimate assumptions leading to that conclusion.
December 24th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
I know that historians are split on this, but I don’t see the first amendment as establishing a principle of separation of church and state. In terms of religion, it only keeps the state from establishing a religion (no Church of the USA like in there is in England). The entire concept of a bill or rights is based on the foundation that rights are provided by the Creator and it is up to government to protect those rights. School sanctioned prayer was always about the acknowledgement of the Creator who has granted rights.
The principle of separation of church and state was solely Jefferson’s idea and comes from his 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists where he says, “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their “legislature” should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.”
I believe that what Jefferson was saying was that it was in no way government’s position to influence a man’s faith. I agree with Jefferson and Madison that no national religion should be established, however, I also side with Philip Schaff who said, “The constitution did not create a nation, nor its religion and institutions. It found them already existing, and was framed for the purpose of protecting them under a republican form of government, in a rule of the people, by the people, and for the people.”
If the founders and on-going vast majority of the nation has accepted that rights are endowed by a Creator, understanding that each man will worship that Creator differently, there is nothing wrong or unconstitutional about school sanctioned prayer to that Creator. I understand that the Supreme Court sees it differently, but I think that is political and not adhereing to a government by the people and for the people.
April 29th, 2011 at 9:44 am
Thanks for that. As an Aussie I have met many Americans who have led me to believe that all prayer in schools is illegal. When I was a school Chaplain in a public school here in Australia I held various prayer groups before school and at lunch time etc..
So glad to hear that students have those same freedoms in the USA too!
We do have a little more freedom here in Australia because our constitution does not clearly state a separation from church and state but rather the Commonwealth (state) cannot legislate to establish religion. This section in our constitution will be tested in the High Court on May 10 – 12.
The Commonwealth Govt has been providing funds for School Chaplains in public schools.
The question or the challenge has been posed that the Commonwealth is in breach of the constitution. The man taking the Commonwealth to court will argue that because Chaplaincy in public schools has grown since the Commonwealth have been assisting with finances then they are in fact ‘establishing religion’
The defendants will no doubt argue that the school communities decide if they want a Chaplain or not and the Commonwealth has made no ‘legislation’ that public schools must have a chaplain.
The High Court will way up the evidence and decide late this year or early next year.
So watch this space : – ) >