[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 123 (Thursday, July 27, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10841-S10842]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


     LEGISLATING PRAYER IN SCHOOLS TRIVIALIZES WHAT PRAYER IS ABOUT

 Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, Dr. Paul Jersild is a professor of 
theology and ethics at Lutheran Theological Southern Seminary in 
Columbia, SC.
  Recently, I had a chance to read a column he wrote for the Columbia 
newspaper, the State, on the issue of prayer in the schools.
  At a time when there is much political malarkey being spread about 
this issue and a lot of concerned people on both sides, I think it is 
worthwhile to listen to a voice of reason.
  I have known Paul Jersild for many years and trust his instinct and 
good judgment.
  I ask that his column be printed in the Record.
  The column follows:
              [From the Columbia (SC) State, June 2, 1995]

     Legislating Prayer in Schools Trivializes What Prayer is About

                           [By Paul Jersild)

       South Carolinians--and the South in general--tend to be 
     ``more religious'' than the rest of the nation. What that 
     means can be debated, but one thing is clear enough: 
     Residents of this state are more likely to support a 
     constitutional amendment which would legalize prayer in the 
     public schools.
       What is it, exactly, that we would accomplish by such an 
     amendment?
       The recent debate on NBC's ``Meet the Press'' between Ralph 
     Reed, executive director of the Christian Coalition, and 
     White House adviser George Stephanopoulos brought out an 
     important point in answering this question. Stephanopoulous 
     noted that under present law, students can pray before meals 
     in school, express their religious views in classroom 
     discussions or even gather at the flagpole before school 
     begins to start off the day with a prayer.
       It is the advocacy of religion on the part of government 
     that is at issue here. No one denies that students can pray, 
     and, in that sense, prayer is not the real issue. What Mr. 
     Reed argued is that an amendment is needed in order to 
     reverse what he sees as a climate of hostility toward 
     expressions of religious faith in public life. The question 
     in my mind--and it is shared by many Christians--is whether 
     an amendment is the appropriate solution to the kind of 
     problem posed by Mr. Reed.
       Here I see a disturbing aspect to religion in the South. 
     Baptists make up the vast majority of church members in this 
     region, and they represent one of the most revered and 
     important traditions in American religious and political 
     history. From their beginnings, Baptists have been known for 
     their vigorous advocacy of separation of church and state in 
     order to assure their own freedom and that of others to 
     practice the religion of their choice.
       But now, with their majority status in the South, Baptists 
     seem to have forgotten this honored tradition. Many of them 
     have become more concerned with politically enforcing a 
     religious practice which they regard as essential to 
     maintaining their version of civic religion. Concern for 
     minority religious groups and non-believers has disappeared 
     as they insist on the ``rights'' of the majority.
       The irony of this situation is obvious, for it is largely 
     their own notable history that has taught us to beware of 
     majoritarian attempts to enforce religious views and 
     practices on the rest of the population.

[[Page S 10842]]

       This whole development carries an important lesson 
     concerning the vagaries and pitfalls of trying to politically 
     shape the practice of religion.
       There is, indeed, a proper role for religious ceremony in 
     the public realm, and separation of church and state should 
     not be understood as the elimination of all religious 
     expression in public life. But when prayer is used as a 
     political weapon to counteract what is perceived as a hostile 
     environment, it is being grossly misused. Passing a law does 
     not create a community of faith where, alone, prayer is both 
     vital and necessary. Enforcing prayer in the classroom (or a 
     silent moment for prayer) turns it into a symbolic act for 
     the sake of a political purpose, which destroys or, at least, 
     trivializes what prayer is about.
       Since Christians disagree among themselves about the wisdom 
     of a prayer amendment, it should be clear that this is not an 
     issue of the church against the state or the rest of society. 
     It is an ideological battle being waged by certain Christians 
     who want to implement their particular vision of a 
     ``Christian'' society. If we can actually legislate that 
     goal, it is not worth achieving.
     

                          ____________________