Home / Our Work / Mission Education / Mission Studies / Spiritual Growth / Concerning Prayer / Prayer issues / Prayer and False Choices

Prayer and False Choices

by J. Ann Craig
"Can you believe they are outlawing prayer?" "They teach a godless creation theory." "Most people in this town are Christians; why should a minority keep us from putting the ten commandments on the courthouse wall?" "We need freedom of religion, not freedom from religion."

These statements characterize the tone of a public conversation going on all over this country. On the surface they appear to promote those values we hold dear as Christians-prayer, a God centered world, ethics based in faith, and freedom to practice our religion. The Bill of Rights is cited to document these positions based on freedom of speech and freedom of religion. So why does it appear that the government is trying to keep Christians from exercising our religion?

We have to begin with the U.S. Constitution which was written at a convention held during 1787. The Constitution took effect following its ratification by the two-thirds of the states in 1788. It defines the structures of government and the processes for a majority rule system. But majority rule has a flaw-minorities still need to be protected. The first Congress understood this reality so one of their first acts was to propose the Bill of Rights. They focused on protecting persons and groups with less power and avoiding excesses in government.

Many things have changed since that time, but some things remain the same. Although the number of religions present in this country has multiplied, personal commitment to one's religion remains passionate and often absolute. The founders of our nation had seen the impact of combining the power of the state with the passions of religion. In England, rules against "non-conformists" suspended rights of citizenship for Unitarians, Quakers and Puritans. John Wesley avoided being punished as a "non-conformist" by reforming from within the Church of England. If a person would not sign a loyalty oath to the Church of England, it was tantamount to treason.

On this continent, colonials like Roger Williams, Anne Hutchinson and William Penn had already been persecuted, ironically by Puritans who had escaped religious persecution in England. Quakers had been hung in Massachusetts, persecuted in Virginia and finally had to establish their own state of Pennsylvania. This history of religious intolerance was well established by the time the Bill of Rights was drafted. Freedom was a hard fought watchword in this nascent country and it was clear that it needed to be protected even from well-intentioned people.

Thomas Jefferson proposed an "Act for Establishing Religious Freedom" to the Virginia State Assembly which passed in 1786, laying the groundwork for freedom of religion in the Bill of Rights for the United States in 1788. Thomas Jefferson was a Deist, he believed in God and morality but not miracles. Jesus, according to Jefferson, was a moral man rather than God. He had reason to want protection for minority opinions.

Jefferson cites unjust laws in Virginia to argue in favor of the disestablishment of religion (excerpted from his "Notes on Virginia," pp. 234-237):

"By our own act of Assembly of 1705, c. 30, if a person brought up in the Christian religion denies the being of God, or the Trinity, or asserts there are more gods than one, or denies the Christian religion to be true, or the Scriptures to be of divine authority, he is punishable on the first offense by incapacity to hold any office or employment, ecclesiastical, civil, or military; on the second, by disability to sue, to take any gift or legacy, to be guardian, executor, or administrator, and by three years' imprisonment without bail. A father's right to the custody of his own children being founded in law on his right of guardianship, this being taken away, they may of course be severed from him, and put by the authority of the court, into more orthodox hands."

This may sound impossible for today but when we object to the separation of church and state, we undermine protection for ourselves and all citizens. Public Christian prayer in government venues such as public school or court rooms puts people of other religions in a position of having to object, leave, or demand time for their own religion's prayer.

The risks are high. Attempts to impose Christian prayer in schools, teach the Genesis story as science, or post the ten commandments in government venues undermine our freedoms. Right wing Christians promote these positions by setting up false either/or choices which imply you are something less than Christian if you disagree. For example, implicit in the argument for public Christian prayer is that if you do not support it, you must be against prayer. The fact that there is no prohibition against silent prayer at any time and any place is ignored.

Similarly, evolution is pitted against "creationism" which claims the Bible says the earth is only 6000 years old. As one bumper sticker puts it, "The big bang theory: BANG! God created it!" Those who believe the planet has evolved over millions of years are caricatured as rejecting God and the Bible. And, since evolution is a "theory," creationists use pseudo scientific jargon (while ignoring all scientific method) to pressure school boards into treating "creationism" as an equal theory with evolution.

Another false choice is between the ten commandments and no values at all. Proponents of teaching Christian values in schools claim that without the ten commandments children are growing up without values. Recent school shooting sprees are blamed on a lack of Christian values. Yet, there is no law against teaching values such as honesty, peace, generosity, justice, hard work, etc. Schools can work in harmony with families, communities and religions to teach these truly common values.

Appeals to the universal character of the ten commandments, ignore the history of persecution experienced by Jews at the hands of Christians over the centuries. If the right wing Christian Germans under Hitler had posted the ten commandments in their courts, would they would have obeyed the command, "Thou shalt not kill?"

Finally, when we are disgusted with what appears to be outlawing of public religion, we need to be clear about our own values. Do we value freedom of religion and freedom from religious coercion just for ourselves or all people? If we were in the minority position, would we want to live by the rules and rituals of someone else's religion. Undoubtedly, we can cite places in the world where Christians are subjected to such treatment. But even so, do we want that for our own country?

The choice is not between whether we get to say our prayers in public or not, the choice is whether or not we all have the freedom to say our prayers and worship in our respective communities without fear of reprisal.

©Women's Division, 2000. This article may be reprinted for use in official United Methodist Women groups and publications or for study purposes. For additional permission to copy call 212-870-3737.