Across our nation religious commentators and conservative talk show hosts are heralding the U.S. Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Town of Greece v. Galloway upholding the constitutionality of permitting invocations at town hall meetings. Many are celebrating the high court’s ruling as an affirmation once again of our country’s rich tradition of solemnizing legislative assemblies by inviting clergy to pray for God’s divine blessing and guidance - a practice that began with the founding of our republic.

But in all this celebration there are three important reasons to read carefully the writing on the wall left from this important decision.

1. A Close Margin Of Victory. This ruling came down to just one justice’s vote. Justice Kennedy, who is often seen as the swing vote on several issues, was the tie-breaker and author of the majority opinion. As a moderate on the bench, Kennedy tries to strike a middle ground that softens the sharp contrasting opinions of the polar factions on the court represented by Justice Alito on the side of the majority and Justice Kagan who authored the dissent. According to Kennedy: “Ceremonial prayer is but a recognition that . . . many Americans deem that their own existence must be understood by precepts far beyond the authority of government to alter or define and that willing participation in civic affairs can be consistent with a brief acknowledgment of their belief in a higher power, always with due respect for those who adhere to other beliefs.”

2. A Call To Worship the Generic American god.  The four dissenting justices - - who happen to comprise some of the youngest members of the court - - give a sobering insight into the liberal mindset regarding the proper place and function of prayer in a post-Christendom America. The dissent can be best summarized as follows: only a prayer to an amorphous ceremonial deity, and one who dares not intervene in the affairs of man, can withstand constitutional muster. In other words, only a prayer that uniformly offends all religions is constitutionally permissible.

3. “God Save The United States And This Honorable Court”.  The U.S. Supreme Court opens each of its sessions with this phrase. This invocation to God for His divine guidance over the proceedings of the court is a tradition that beckons back in antiquity to phrases like “God save the King.” To the dissenting justices, this phrase, like the phrase “In God We Trust” on our coins, and the God of the Pledge of Allegiance is nothing more than a harmless tribute to ceremonial deism and should not be construed as a reference to the God of creation or to Abraham’s God. To quote from Justice Kagan: “When the citizens of this country approach their government, they do so only as Americans, not as members of one faith or another.” 572 U.S. ____ , Slip Op. at 24-25.

Not so long ago, in our father’s generation, Justice Douglas writing for this same court stated:

"We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Divine being.. . . The First Amendment, however, does not say that in every and all respects there shall be a separation of Church and State...Otherwise the state and religion would be aliens to each other - hostile, suspicious, and even unfriendly... Municipalities would not be permitted to render police or fire protection to religious groups. Policemen who helped parishioners into their places of worship would violate the Constitution. Prayers in our legislative halls; the appeals to the Almighty in the messages of the Chief Executive; the proclamations making Thanksgiving Day a holiday; "so help me God" in our courtroom oaths - these and all other references to the Almighty that run through our laws, our public rituals, our ceremonies would be flouting the First Amendment. A fastidious atheist or agnostic could even object to the supplication with which the Court opens each session: 'God save the United States and this Honorable Court...'" Zorach v. Clausen, 343 U.S. 306 (1952).

The lesson to be learned from the Town of Greece decision is not that we should celebrate a narrowly squeaked in victory for religious liberty. It is instead a signpost of a rapidly changing secularist view of prayer and its diminishing role in American public life. Prayer at town hall meetings, according to the dissent, should remain, but only as a meaningless genuflect to a ceremonial, vanilla god. One must ask today if, we truly are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Divine being, then why does a growing segment of our society insist that we relegate the God of creation to a position of relative unimportance?

“God save this court” and town hall invocations are more than a time-honored tribute to the god who isn’t. They are a desperate recognition that if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without God's notice how then shall a nation rise without His blessing?

Larry L. Crain

Senior Counsel and Founder

Church Law Institute