Chris Berry On The Net

There’s a controversy brewing in my hometown about the practice of opening city council meetings with a prayer. It began a couple of weeks ago when our vice mayor opened the regular meeting with a prayer that made reference to the son of God. Keep in mind, council meetings around here have always opened with a prayer, but it’s supposed to be one of those newfangled “nonsectarian prayers” that are designed to protect the sensibilities of those who might subscribe to a different mythology.

When the meeting ended, an angry but anonymous attendee fired off an email to city officials complaining that the prayer was illegal, since it made reference to a specific religious belief. The vice mayor responded by stating that he was a Christian, hence he could not pray without invoking the name of Jesus Christ. Rather than offering up a meaningless nonsectarian prayer in the future, he would simply forfeit his place in the normal opening prayer rotation. Naturally, someone had to contact the ACLU, but they refused to get involved since the vice mayor had agreed to no longer pray in the name of Jesus. It appeared that the crisis had been averted.

No one on the city council has claimed credit for inviting a guest pastor to the next meeting, but it wasn’t especially surprising when he opened with a fervent prayer in the name of Jesus Christ. When interviewed after the meeting, our vice mayor claimed that the city had no control over what the man had said, since he was a private citizen and not a member of the council. This pathetic attempt at side-stepping the rules didn’t sit well with the handful of anti-prayer activists in town.

If you’re not familiar with Roanoke, we’re in the heart of Bible country, less than an hour’s drive from the headquarters of the late Reverend Jerry Falwell. A quick glance at our local paper is all you need to see that folks around here take their religion pretty seriously. The editorial pages are usually filled with letters promoting Intelligent Design, and blaming all of our problems on a general decline in religiosity. The consensus is that a Christian prayer without Christ is pretty much pointless. Even as a steadfast non-believer, I have to agree with them on that point.

The idea of nonsectarian prayer is a ridiculous concept invented by politicians and bureaucrats to avoid facing the larger issue of separation of Church and State. The rationale is that as long as the public prayer doesn’t mention any specific religious belief, then there is no violation of the establishment clause. Like so many other examples of poorly conceived government solutions, by attempting to protect the sensibilities of various minorities, the policy of non-sectarian prayer manages to offend nearly everyone.

The problem is that people of faith believe in very specific Gods. Religion is by definition an explicit set of beliefs for which there is no generic alternative. Expecting Christians to pray without invoking Christ makes no more sense than asking a Pastafarian to worship a plate of macaroni and cheese. All of this begs the main question; given the unsatisfactory nature of generic prayer, why do we continue to make it a part of our public ceremonies?

As a non-believer I am not offended by anyone’s private religious beliefs, and I feel strongly that I deserve the same tolerance for my own. What offends me is the idea that private beliefs must be turned into a public spectacle at official gatherings. It’s not the mention of Jesus Christ that bothers me, but the idea that we cannot conduct public business without first asking for supernatural oversight. The fact that our city council cannot reach a conclusion on any matter of consequence, even with the guiding hand of a generic god, is sufficient proof to me that he cannot exist.