There is a poem history teachers use to
help students remember what happened to the wives of Henry VIII:
"Divorced,
Beheaded, Died;
Divorced,
Beheaded, Survived."
Henry
obviously had issues when it came to marriage and family life. In the 1500's there was a great struggle for
power between the King and the Pope.
Catherine of Aragon was married to Henry's brother, Arthur. When Arthur died, Henry wanted to marry
Catherine but Catholic law forbade a man to marry his dead brother's wife. Pope Clement VII refused the annulment and
the rest is history. Henry removed the
authority of the Pope from England which paved the way for the establishment of
the Church of England.
Roger
Williams fled to America to escape religious persecution in England. He established the colony of Rhode Island as
a haven for religious minorities. Many
of the early American settlers came to America to escape the abusiveness of a church
that had become more about government and power than the actual kingdom of God.
Our founding fathers had this history fresh in their minds when they wrote our
Declaration of Independence and our Constitution.
The
very first amendment was constructed to prevent a repeat of what had happened
in Europe. "Congress shall make no
law respecting an establishment of religion." In the context of the times, this meant that
our founding fathers did not want the government meddling in the affairs of the
church. They didn't want a
state-sanctioned church. This portion of
the first amendment is referred to as the 'establishment clause'.
But
the original authors of our Constitution did not stop there. They added what has become known as the 'free
exercise' clause. Not only was the
government not to make any laws about establishing a state religion but they
were "not to deny the free exercise thereof". Government was not to
interfere with the right of its citizens to practice their religion so long as
these practices were not disruptive to society or in violation of the moral
laws of the nation.
Men who are politically persuaded are often driven to absurdity in
order to prove a point or defend a political doctrine. In Engel v. Vitale, 1962, the Supreme Court
decided that it was irreparably harmful for our children to recite a non-denominational
prayer composed by the New York State Board of Regents, "Almighty God, we
acknowledge our dependence on Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our
parents, our teachers, and our Country."
The board was plugging the prayer because they were much concerned about
the recent decline in morality and ethical behavior of students within the
system.
The
Supreme Court voted the prayer down by a vote of 5-2. Justice Hugo Black represented the majority
opinion when he wrote: "In this
country, it is no part of the business of the government to compose official
prayers for any group of the American people to recite as a part of a religious
program carried on by government."
Black also made reference to Thomas Jefferson's opinion on the matter
and many assume the constitution is the source of his opinion.
In
October of 1801 a group of Baptists from Danbury, Connecticut wrote a letter of
concern to President Jefferson. These
Danbury Baptists found themselves a minority group in Connecticut and they were
fearful that the Congregational Church would be made a state church and their
right to worship freely would be violated.
Jefferson answered their concerns in a letter by declaring that as long
as he were president there would be no state sponsored church at the federal
level. The phrase "separation of
church and state" was lifted from his letter, not from the Constitution.
The
minority opinion of Engel v. Vitale was expressed by Justice Potter Stewart:
"I think the Court has misapplied a great constitutional principle. I
cannot see how an "official religion" is established by letting those
who want to say a prayer say it. On the contrary, I think that to deny the wish
of these school children to join in reciting this prayer is to deny them the
opportunity of sharing in the spiritual heritage of our Nation."
Proponents
would argue that prayer in public schools does not amount to government
establishing a religion. If so, some
blatant inconsistencies must be addressed.
Is the U.S. government trying to establish religion when scripture
verses are chiseled on thousands of public buildings? Is the government trying to establish
religion when chaplains are employed in the armed services and in the U.S.
Congress? Is the government trying to
establish religion when it promotes the celebration of religious holidays such
as Christmas and Easter?
There
is a great difference between "freedom of religion" (worship as you
choose) and "freedom from religion" (government imposed
religion). Proponents of prayer in public
schools want a government that respects the religious nature and heritage of
our Christian youth. The U.S. government
has never sponsored any one denomination or specific belief system. But the founding fathers were unashamedly and
unabashedly Christian in their beliefs.
Of the first 108 universities founded in America, 106 were distinctly
Christian, including the first university in America, Harvard. The original Harvard Student Handbook of 1636
addressed the study of scriptures by Harvard students: "Let every student be plainly instructed
and earnestly pressed to consider well, the main end of his life and studies
is, to know God and Jesus Christ, which is eternal life, and therefore to lay
Jesus Christ as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and
learning." The foundation for this
idea was found in John 17:3 "And this is eternal life, that they know you
the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent."
There
is a more recent inconsistency that must be addressed. Ten parents joined the ACLU (American Civil
Liberties Union) in the lawsuit against the New Hyde Park Board of Education to
eliminate prayer from public schools. The
ACLU fought well and was successful in limiting prayerful expression in public
schools.
Carver
Elementary school in San Diego is possibly going to allow Muslim students to
pray in school. Can you hear the theme
song of "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" in your mind as the ACLU rides their black steeds into
town to put down the praying Muslims?
Not so. Kevin Keenan, a
spokesperson for the ACLU defends the practice of Muslims praying in public
schools: "Performing these prayers
is widely -- if not universally -- recognized as one of the five essential
'pillar' of Islam. One of these prayer
times will always fall during the school day at Carver when students are
required by law to be in school."
Is
prayer for Christians not also recognized as essential to Christianity? The same ACLU that has been fighting freedom
of religion in public schools is 'fine and dandy' when it comes to Muslims
praying in public schools. So, let's be
honest. The real fight here is not about
prayer in public schools, the real fight is about suppressing Christianity in
America.
Kevin Probst - Teaches History, Government and Apologetics at the high school level in Columbus Georgia.
No comments:
Post a Comment