The title is not a trick question. I ask that you read the following before giving your final answer.
Baptists have always been a people of prayer, be it a part of their devotional life or their corporate worship. It is the avenue through which we commune with God through his Son, Jesus Christ. Our religious forefathers suffered and died protecting every person’s rights to pray and worship in freedom and safety according to one’s convictions.
Our Baptist forebears, upon coming to America seeking the freedom to worship in a way they believed pleased God, were well aware of the dangers of a state church, and of how such an institution had encroached on the precious right of religious freedom. They also had the wisdom to see that this right extended not only to their particular faith but also to all faiths, and even to those who chose to have no religious faith.
John Leland, a Baptist minister who suffered religious persecution, provided a list of suggestions for James Madison as he shaped the first 10 amendments to the Constitution of the United States. The results of his efforts are enshrined in that document’s First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of religion. In what is known as the Establishment Clause of this amendment, government is forbidden from doing anything that would show favoritism toward any religious faith and from doing anything that could be seen as coercing people to participate in one particular faith, or as persecuting them for having no faith. Baptists continue to be at the forefront in ensuring that this remains the case today.
While many people may think of the 1950s through the halcyon memories of the “good old days,” it was, politically, a time of turmoil: the Cold War, the rise of godless communism, the threat of nuclear annihilation. Christians responded, as they have in times past when facing danger, with renewed religious fervor. Significant among those activities was a 1952 six-week religious campaign in Washington, D.C., led by the evangelist Billy Graham. He held events in the National Guard Armory and on the steps of our nation’s Capitol. He called for a national day of prayer, stating, “our nation was founded upon God, religion and the church.” He added, “what a thrilling, glorious thing it would be to see leaders of our country today kneeling before almighty God in prayer.” I doubt that many of you reading Graham’s statement would disagree.
As a result of Graham’s crusade, a bill was introduced in Congress to establish a National Day of Prayer. In April 1952, Congress passed, and President Truman signed, a law providing that “the President shall set aside and proclaim a suitable day each year, other than a Sunday, as a National Day of Prayer, on which the people of the United States may turn to God in prayer and meditation at churches, in groups, and as individuals.” In 1988, after lobbying done by Campus Crusade for Christ, the law was amended to specify the first Thursday in May as a National Day of Prayer. So we see that the National Day of Prayer law, while written in a manner to be inclusive of other faiths, is clearly the result of Christian efforts.
Our founding fathers knew something about how mixing religion and politics could be more divisive than uniting. In September 1774, when the Continental Congress met for its inaugural session, a delegate proposed opening the session with prayer. Delegates John Jay and John Rutledge (both future Supreme Court Justices) objected. They believed that Congress was “so divided in religious Sentiments … that We could not join in the same Act of Worship.”
This religious divisiveness continues today with the National Day of Prayer — an event envisioned by Graham as a day to bring all people together. A complicating factor has been the involvement of the National Day of Prayer Task Force, chaired by Shirley Dobson. The task force’s purpose is to organize and promote prayer observances conforming to a Judeo-Christian system of values.
In 2008, a national Jewish organization complained that the National Day of Prayer had been “hijacked by Christian conservatives.” Other groups — Hindus, Buddhists and Muslims, for example — have complained that they felt excluded from National Day of Prayer activities. In Plano, Texas, two groups held separate prayer services after fighting over the right to hold their events at the city council building. In Memphis, Tenn., local groups complained that the National Day of Prayer makes “members of minority religions feel that unless they adhere to Christianity they are unpatriotic.” In Springfield, Ill., organizers declared the event is “only about Jesus and Jesus the Savior alone.” Mormons in Salt Lake City were excluded from National Day of Prayer events because their beliefs are not “in accordance with the evangelical principles [of] the task force.”
A challenge was filed March 2, 2010, by members of the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), claiming that the National Day of Prayer violated the Constitution’s Establishment Clause. On April 15, U.S District Judge Barbara Crabb, in Wisconsin, issued a careful, 66-page opinion declaring the laws creating a National Day of Prayer a violation of the Establishment Clause. Judge Crabb ordered that her decision would not take effect until the time for appealing it had elapsed. The Obama administration has said it will appeal.
Among Judge Crabb’s statements was that “the primary injury plaintiffs [the FFRF group] allege is the feeling of unwelcomeness and exclusion they experience as nonreligious persons because of what they view as a message from the government that it favors Americans who pray.” She also stated that she saw no problems with a President making proclamations for a day of prayer, or praying himself.
I offer a couple of quotes for us to ponder as we think about the court’s decision (and possibly a later Supreme Court decision). The first, from 1808, is by Thomas Jefferson, who opposed national declarations of days of prayer by the federal government: “Fasting and prayer are religious exercises; the enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the time for these exercises, and the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets; and this right can never be safer than in their hands, where the Constitution has deposited it.”
Around 1813, President James Madison proclaimed a day of prayer, though he later said that such proclamations were inappropriate. “They seem to imply and certainly nourish the erroneous idea of a national religion,” he said.
One of the hardest tasks we all face is the ability (and willingness) to critically examine a practice with which we may fully agree. Failure to do so can threaten the very right we hold dear — the freedom to worship and pray as we feel led. This requires that we accept and uphold the Constitution that protects the right of people who believe differently from us to practice their faith freely — and to do so without feeling marginalized or persecuted. It is this freedom that sets America apart, and makes us the beacon of light to the world.
Judge Crabb’s ruling does not prevent an individual, minister or ecumenical group from establishing a National Day of Prayer. The best way to ensure religious liberty is to let government take care of its business and leave matters of faith to individuals and religious leaders.
Greg Versen wrote this article at the request of the Baptist General Association of Virginia’s religious liberty committee. A member of Harrisonburg Baptist Church in Harrisonburg, Versen was a professor of social work at James Madison University for 25 years before retiring. He is secretary of the religious liberty committee and also serves on the board of the Baptist Joint Committee for Religious Liberty in Washington.