In his new book, The Case for Civility: And Why Our Future Depends on It (pp. 66-7), Os Guinness has some perceptive insights on the issue of school prayer:
[S]upporters of school prayer have found themselves on the horns of a dilemma of their own choosing. Insisting on official Christian prayer in such pluralistic settings, they either ignore the diversity and pray as if everyone shared their faith—thus scandalizing those who do not; or they respect the diversity and pray in an inoffensive way that tries to appeal to as many faiths as possible—thus secularizing their own faith while still offending those who reject public prayer of any kind. …
The founders’ first principles of religious liberty can of course be applied to school prayer in several ways. For example, the golden rule of equal liberty for all could be applied to school prayer as “One in, all in” and respected by praying a different prayer every day of the school month–Christian one day, Jewish the next, Muslim after that, then Buddhist, Hindu, Mormon, Scientologist, Wiccan, and so on, until all the faiths in the school are covered. Such a policy would surely lead to chaos and indifference rather than tolerance. …
The alternative application of the golden rule would be to say, “One out, all out,” and to conclude—I think rightly, for religious even more than constitutional reasons—that public schools are not the place to have official teacher-led prayer, Christian or otherwise. A moment of silence, perhaps; and free to pray alone at any time; and freedom to pray in student-initiated groups after school hours, certainly; but not official prayer in public schools when contemporary levels of the social fact of pluralism mean that the principle of religious liberty for all is contravened.
I couldn’t agree more. I am opposed to bringing teacher-led prayer (TLP) back into the public schools. One thing advocates of TLP often overlook is that the prayers being offered by that teacher will reflect that teacher’s religious views, which may or may not be Christian. If they are not Christian, then what advantage is there of the prayer? I think it is in our best interests to adopt the “one out, all out” approach.
HT: Justin Taylor
Thinking to Believe 
February 25, 2008 at 5:31 pm
I agree, teacher led prayer with such diversity would not be beneficial to Christians. Do you believe that if the founding fathers had known that there would be religions other than Christianity represented they would have worded the first ammendment differently?
LikeLike
February 26, 2008 at 12:21 pm
“One out all out” approach…I AGREE…if I were to expound, I would be redundant to what has already been mentioned.
Question – Mike mentioned about the founding fathers…are we recognizing the founding fathers as those such as the former presidents and leaders whom our constitution was built by/upon? I have recently learned through my studies that many of them were actually not Christians at all (though their terminology such as “God” was evident)…Jefferson, Adams, etc…I was reading some of their quotes and treaties…quite interesting.
LikeLike
February 26, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Michael B,
When we are talking about the founding fathers we are talking about the 55 delegates of the Constitutional convention. And when you look at their religious affiliation, all but a few were committed Christians. And when you look at the few, they were not orthodox Christians, but they were Christians of one sort or another. See http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5097 for more reading on this.
LikeLike
February 26, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Mike,
I’m not sure. I wouldn’t think so. The principle would remain the same: Congress is not to establish any national religion, regardless of whether it be a particular Christian denomination, or some other non-Christian religion.
Jason
LikeLike
February 27, 2008 at 6:08 am
Jason,
THANKS for that clarification. I am going to pass on that link. Fyi, of course, the studies I mentioned included one of my seminary classes, out of a book we had to read, written by an atheist! Go figure I guess…
ps (I am the same Michael that has posted in the past, but picked up the “b” since there is another Mike! But I will let him take Mike and I will continue to press on in Jesus name with Michael, minus the “b”, lol)
LikeLike
February 28, 2008 at 10:53 pm
yes but clearly they didn’t intend it in the same way it is being interpreted today. I draw on their own practices for this assertion. I do not think they, in their time, would have had a problem with tlp in school. As you mention all but a few were committed Christians. Their fear it seems was a state religion, such as the Anglican church not other religions. I wonder if they ever considered the power the first ammendment would have given the minority of non Chritians today and if they would not have attempted to make it stronger to favor Christianity.
LikeLike
February 29, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Mike,
You’re absolutely right. They had no problem at all with TLP in school. TLP was the norm. Let me be clear. I am not arguing that TLP is unconstitutional. Given the diversity of religions represented in America, I think TLP is impractical, and is not likely to strengthen Christianity in this country.
While the Founding Fathers definitely saw Christianity as the true religion, I don’t think they would have changed the wording of the First Amendment had they known other religious views would become a strong minority in this country. What they stated was a principle: the government should not be involved in religious dogma, or ecclesiastical affairs. That applies to any religion.
Jason
LikeLike
April 17, 2008 at 8:15 am
Jason, I’m glad that you have voiced this. I have been gotten so weary of hearing preachers rail on the fact that we do not have TLP any longer. For the very reasons you have mentioned in the original post I have been against TLP for some time. I think sometimes we as Christians get too caught up in our own beliefs that we do not realize that “prayer” is a generic term that is used in various religions. With that in mind, allowing TLP would likely be counterproductive to what Christians are trying to gain by having TLP.
LikeLike
April 17, 2008 at 10:03 am
Yes, it is a common theme in Christian circles. Os’s message is not a popular one, but it’s a truthful and practical one.
Jason
LikeLike