Regional Report; 14; School Prayers

I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry. The following program is from NET, the National Educational Television Network. National Educational Television presents Regional Report, a program of fact and comment by NET reporters throughout the country. Today's subject, Prayer in School. Here is the National Editor of Regional Report, Paul Niven.

In June 1963, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that no state or locality could require daily Bible reading or prayer in its public schools. Such prescribed activities, the court said, constituted religious exercises and, as such, violated the First Amendment to the Constitution, or rather that clause of the First Amendment which prohibits the establishment of any religion. But our complicated and pluralistic society does not respond instantly or monolithically to edicts from even its highest court. 13 years after the desegregation ruling, we still have segregation in many of our public schools. And almost four years after the prayer ruling, we still have daily prayers in many of our schools. To be sure, the surviving religious exercises are often described officially as voluntary rather than prescribed. But some of them hardly appear to be spontaneous. A report from the State of Texas. Please remain standing in pride with me, the Lord's Prayer. Our Father, who art in heaven,

hall of be thy name, thy kingdom come, hall of be done, hall of be done, hall of be desegregation. Give us this day our daily prayer and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. These children are praying in a public school classroom in Texas. This particular classroom is in Houston, the largest city in the state. But the scene is not restricted to Houston. This is an unscheduled but not unusual part of the opening exercises in most Texas schools. I'm Carl Brazel. When the Supreme Court stated its historic prayer opinion in 1963, Texas School Board Lawyers apparently wasted little time in explaining the decision to board

members who were vitally concerned how they could satisfy the expectations of their communities and stay within the law. Since the Supreme Court in effect outlawed and prescribed prayer in public school ceremonies, it's rather difficult to find this prescribed prayer in Texas schools today. But it is not difficult to find prayer. Prayer, which at least on the surface, can be described as voluntary. How voluntary, of course, remains unanswered. Meantime, prayer continues in schools across Texas. A survey on this subject was conducted recently by the Texas Council of Churches. We discussed the findings of the study with the Council's Director of Religion and Public Education, Dr. C. T. Gifford. Dr. Gifford, a recent survey by the Texas Council of Churches, shows a rather large percentage of Texas schools still allowing prayer in classrooms. Will you please detail and fool the disclosures of this survey? Well, in the particular survey that I made, which

covered 210 of our larger public schools in Texas, showed that over 70% of these schools were still conducting religious devotions as a part of the registered program. And we found that only 29% of these schools did not conduct religious devotions. Now, in Texas, of course, we might expect that religious devotions would continue in the public schools because of our particular background. We are part of the Bible belt extended across the south. And where devotions, prayer, and Bible reading became very much of a tradition. And where it is pretty difficult to separate tradition from religion.

Dr. Gifford strikes a vital point when he notes the difficulty in separating religion from tradition. Texas is a state steeped in tradition, and in many situations only token effort is made to adjust to a new way which might alter a traditional course. Most Texas school boards apparently feel that prayer and devotional periods are an integral part of their obligations, and they have no intentions of changing. This is Robert Y. Eccles, member of the Houston School Board and former president. Mr. Eccles, what is the position of the Houston School Board on the 1963 Supreme Court decision on prayer in the public schools? The 1963 decision had nothing to do in the Houston schools because it had ruled out a prescribed compulsory prayer. The Houston schools have always encouraged prayer that they have no prescribed scripture or prescribed manner in which it should be done, and it's strictly

on a voluntary basis. Is there any prayer at all in the Houston school district at this time? We encourage prayer in the opening ceremonies, and our board meetings are open with the recognition of the deity and the large prayer. We encourage it, but we don't require it, and it's strictly on a voluntary basis. Are there any guidelines used by the teachers in the Houston Independent School District in preparing the material to be used in the devotional period you speak of? This is left up to the principal of each school. We encourage him to have a devotional and they design it, and in most part they use the students and the students, and their own organization work out the devotional that opens the school day. When you speak of a voluntary prayer, Mr. Eccles, do you mean voluntary participation? And generally a student composition. The students are the ones that are running the whole thing. These students have an opportunity to express their beliefs and their thoughts

in their prayer. We don't tell them what to pray about. But prayer is part of the opening exercise in Houston schools, as it is in many others across the state, such as in Fort Worth. Fort Worth, like Houston, is a sophisticated metropolis in many ways. Fort Worth is a city of under a million people whose school board is presided over by a corporation public relations executive, Lloyd Turner. Mr. Turner did the 1963 Supreme Court decision on prayer in schools, prompt any direct action by the Fort Worth school board. No, sir. We have had in our Fort Worth public school system a policy on the Bible reading and prayer, and it has been essential to the same for many years. In our school system, we have the following policy, I'll read from our policy manual. The voluntary reading without comment of the Holy Bible by students, teachers, and principals in the Fort Worth public schools is permissible, but not mandatory. Also, silent prayers are non-sectarian prayers are permissible. Any

student upon request may be excused from either activity. Now that is the only statement in our policy manual about this, we have the same statement under the rules and regulations pertaining to teachers. This one I quoted from is under the rules and regulations pertaining to the administrators. Is there any voluntary prayer to your knowledge being conducted in the Fort Worth schools at this time? I would assume so, but I can't say since that's strictly up to the individuals, principals, and teachers, and schools. And it's done on a spontaneous basis. Correct. Just 40 miles to the east of Fort Worth lies the sprawling metropolis of Dallas. Fort Worth and Dallas are sister cities by distance, but they're poles apart in attitudes. Dallas is a city of contrasts in many respects, and the question of prayer in public schools finds no simple answer here. Until recent years, Dallas frequently

was described as the southwest's most cosmopolitan city, aggressive universities, a fashion center, modern, and progressive architecture. And all this is quite true. However, this is a very superficial analysis, because beneath this veneer of limitless progression, there lies a very deep-seated, unbudging traditionalism, a traditionalism that is held with a respect much akin to sacredness. That traditionalism is dramatically exemplified by the reputation Dallas has acquired in recent years, or unabashed conservatism. Dallas is frequently called this country's most conservative city. The tremendous amount of national and international publicity received by Dallas in the past few years has caused many residents and community leaders here to view with alarm and suspicion any inquiry from the outside. Such was the case when we talked with several officials of the Dallas school system. None of whom would

agree to go on a film interview. We talked with Don Matthews, Assistant Superintendent in charge of special affairs. Mr. Matthews says there is no feeling concerning this prayer matter in Dallas. He says the Dallas school board has no policy on prayers or devotionals in the public schools. Mr. Matthews goes on to say that there is no official prayer in the Dallas school system, and there never has been. However, in spite of his apparent comprehensive knowledge of activities in the Dallas schools, when asked whether there is prayer of any type in Dallas schools, Mr. Matthews said he could not answer that question. You stated a moment ago, Dr. Gifford, that the type of prayer that is being conducted in schools in Texas are of a somewhat routine religious right nature. Would this not then come under the ruling of the Supreme Court as the type of prayer or religious ceremony

that should be outlawed? Well, I think in general that most of the religious activities that are carried on in the schools would come under the Supreme Court ban that is being unconstitutional. But there are some places where students go voluntarily before they are opening a school and have a period of prayer and vibary. Now, the Supreme Court has made no comment on this time type of religious activities. Still directing your attention, Dr. Gifford, to these prayers which you say would come under the Supreme Court decision as illegal or unconstitutional. Why, in your opinion, have these not been discontinued in schools across Texas? Well, I think there are two or three reasons. One is that I believe that these religious devotions are the foundation for teaching morals and ethics to the public

school students. I think I public school officials, the ministers, my churches, the parents of children believe that this is for the best interest of the students. Another thing is that this has become traditional and no one wants to buck this particular tradition. School officials are not going to get into a controversial area by banning these and the church people have not asked that they be banned. There has been no change in these practices since the Supreme Court ruling. About the same percentage are conducting the religious devotions now as they did prior to the Supreme Court ruling. This is Austin, the capital city of Texas. Austin is very little different than any other

state capital. Life here centers around the official state functions and the intellectual atmosphere of a university. In this case, the University of Texas. Austin also is the adopted home of Madeline Murray O'Hare, the former Baltimore social worker whose devout atheism motivated her to carry a lawsuit to the Supreme Court. That suit which resulted in the historic decision on prayer in public schools. Why are you living in Austin, Texas, Mrs. O'Hare? Well, I'm living in Austin, Texas because I was kidnapped, incidentally, from Mexico illegally and brought to Texas to stand trial for alleged crimes in Maryland, all of which later on proved to be in court both illegal and unconstitutional. I had to fight extradition from Austin, Texas, which is the capital of the state of Texas. When we moved here, my husband fell in love with Austin. It's a beautiful little clean town and the only industries here are government and the University of Texas. So we like it. We like the intellectual climate. We like

the physical and geographic position of it. And we enjoy the people here. There has been no harassment of us of any kind. Do you feel the Supreme Court prayer ruling is being observed nationally? I think for the bet for the most part, it is being observed nationally. There were a big bulking areas at first. The state of Delaware, you know, came out and absolutely refused to subscribe to the prayer ruling. And there was a case that went clear up through the U.S. Court of Appeals in the state of Delaware. Another whole bout was the state of Kentucky and some parts of Tennessee, also Southern California. But this has diminished over the years so that now I think there is more conformity to this than there has been from the beginning onward. Are Texas schools conforming to the ruling? Now I speak all over Texas, as you know, and no matter where I am on the platform, people will sneak up to me afterwards and say, I have a child in such and such a public school.

And do you know they're still praying there? Will you do something about it? Now in order to go ahead and do something about this, one must have a child in a school where there is prayer, my child is not in a school where they pray. As a matter of fact, my child isn't in a school where they say pledge of allegiance under God or I would challenge that in Texas. But I do feel that Texas is one of the states where individual persons have taken it upon themselves to introduce the prayer or continue the prayer. And this is out of a sort of text and defiance and individuality and approached by certain principles. I very definitely feel that religious ceremony in school is a flagrant violation of our Constitution and the whole concept of separation of church and state and feel that this should be across the board administered in a very severe way, dealing unkindly with persons who insist on having the Bible and prayer in the school.

Any of your feelings, Mrs. O'Hare, on the proposal that has been put forth concerning the teaching about religion instead of the teaching for religion? I'm glad that you phrased it in that particular way because in the United States, at every level of public education and private education, there is teaching for religion. I think that there should be just teaching of religion. I think that beginning in the fifth grade, it should be coercive that children should be forced to start a religious education. And that this should include the comparative study of all religions, the study of all the religious books, the texts from which religions flow, the Korra and the Vida, the Upanishads, the Bible, the Old Testament as opposed to the New Testament, and the teachings of Buddha right down the line. I think that there should be a tremendous study on the literature of religion, on the impact of religion, historically and sociologically upon people. And I think that if this happens, a religion will die because the last thing that religion can stand

is an unbiased glare of publicity or an unblocked biased opening into all of the mystiques or mysteries of religion. We must develop a series of texts and we must train teachers who will be capable of teaching religion objectively for its historical and literary values and keeping with the Supreme Court decisions. I feel that public school people are not actually going to discontinue these religious devotions until they can offer some kind of a substitute. So I have a feeling that in the future we're going to have more courses about the Bible and more courses about religion aside from the religious part that the Supreme Court ruled against. Now the Fort Worth public schools, we haven't moved into that and I can't

speak for the board but I believe that is going to be the trend in this country. I think that religion, as a subject, should be restricted to the college level or to the parochial schools. In the public schools, as we have here in Houston, I think religion is a topic which should be taught in the home. I don't think that we should ever do away with the concept that we are a Christian nation and should therefore recognize the deity and invoke his pleasures at the beginning of each day. Good morning, this is Denise Steele from Mr. Ronner's Hanan One Home Room. Would you please stand for the pledge to the flag of our country and remain standing for today's prayer, taken from page one of the Houston Post. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Dear Lord, make us to know that your wonderful promise holds good today, that your loud

and guidance are sufficient to carry us through. There is little question that prayers are being offered in Texas schools on a regular basis. School board officials statewide feel quite secure in the fact that these prayers are not prescribed prayers. They feel that by only urging the teachers to include prayers in their opening ceremonies of each school day, they are avoiding a conflict with the Supreme Court's 1963 decision on the prayer issue. However, it is highly questionable whether the method actually is within the law. It appears that school board policy urging a prayer period is tantamount to prescribing a prayer. This of course would be a violation. On the other hand, the entire opinion by the Supreme Court in 1963 is written in such vague and difficult to analyze terms. It probably will take another court test to determine the specific application to the Texas situation. And until such a ruling is obtained, if ever, prayer will continue in Texas schools.

This is Carl Brazil in Texas. Opposition to the 1963 court ruling has been extremely vocal. A California congressman produced a petition protesting the decision signed by 170,000 people. House Republican leader Gerald Ford reported that the bulk of his mail from his constituents in Michigan consisted of letters on this one issue. Senate Republican leader Everett Dirksen led a campaign to upset the high court ruling by amending the Constitution, a report from Dirksen's home state of Illinois. I'm Jack Mabley reporting for WTTW in Chicago. As a columnist and editor for Chicago's American, I've been recording and commenting on the public affairs of Senator Dirksen for several decades. We in Illinois have a special interest in the school prayer issue because our senior senator is the author of a constitutional amendment which would allow school prayer. The heart of the Dirksen amendment is simple

and direct. It is. Nothing contained in this Constitution shall prohibit the authority administering any school school system educational institution or other public building supported in whole or in part through the expenditure of public funds from providing for or permitting the voluntary participation by students or others in prayer. Nothing contained in this article shall authorize any such authority to prescribe the form or content of any prayer. Article one of the Bill of Rights which the Dirksen amendment seeks to amend or clarify or augment states that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Senator Dirksen has stated that the school prayer amendment is the most important single accomplishment which he hopes to attain in his remaining years in Congress.

The senator's constituents in Illinois have been fairly representative I believe in their reactions to the school prayer controversy. Wherever possible most school boards tried to act as though the problem doesn't exist. Commencements go on as always clergymen bless this land and the graduates and they call for God's grace and the school board members sit in their chairs keep their fingers crossed and hope nobody raises a fuss. A few baccalaureate ceremonies have been moved to churches from school auditoriums. In Niles Township a cluster of suburbs north of Chicago some parents did object to prayers at the commencement exercises in high school and the prayers were dropped. There was some hubbub and some tense board meetings but the prayers remained out. In the one case here which did reach federal court the opponents of school prayer lost. The trial revolved around a familiar little prayer which was recited by kindergarten and first grade children in a school in decal

by college town near Chicago. We thank you for the world so sweet we thank you for the food we eat. We thank you for the birds that sing. We thank you God for everything. Lyle and Mary Despain the parents of Laura 5 and Roger 6 objected that the prayer was to a divine being and that it violated their constitutional rights to free worship. The school board amended the prayer by eliminating the word God from the fourth line so that it would read we thank you for everything. The despains were not satisfied. They brought suit in federal court contending that it was still a prayer because you could only be God. The attorney for the school board testified that you referred to anyone bringing food and protection to the children such as firemen or policemen. He did not say who was the you who made the birds sing. In a 27 page opinion federal judge Edwin A. Robson who incidentally

was appointed by Senator Dirksen dismissed the suit with this opinion. He said the nation's educational processes would become sterile if the courts should allow themselves to be injected into disputes such as this. Still unresolved is what the ruling would have been had the word God remained in the prayer. Senator Dirksen was not modified. He took the floor of the Senate. He said God should have remained in the prayer. We thank you for the world so sweet. Who Dirksen asked the Senate? We thank you for the food we eat. Whom do we thank thundered the senator? They do not say whom they are thanking. That is really quite something. Quoting the senator. In the spring of 1964 the House Judiciary Committee held hearings on a number of resolutions on the school prayers which were introduced in the House. The transcript of the hearings covered nearly 2,800 printed pages which

is rather substantial evidence there is a great deal it may be said on the issue and was said. Senator Dirksen's prayer amendment was placed before the Senate last September 19, accompanied by Dirksen aeration which took 60 columns of tightly spaced type to record in the congressional record. Senator Dirksen's views of course are lavishly and fully set forth in this dissertation. He spoke with scorn of those who would destroy great religious traditions in our land. Atheists topped his list of destroyers with Madeleine Murray his prime target. Free thinkers who assume a liberal posture were attacked. Communisms goal of liberating world from yoke of religious belief was the target of Dirksen's tongue. But it's part of the ferment that is in the air today and carried to its logical conclusion. It may invite repressive measures and when it does then what happens to freedom.

The senators spoke scathingly of theologians and church representatives who are posed to school prayer and he said this. The board of social concern maybe that is the trouble with the country and the world today. We are so given to social concerns that we have no time left for concern with a soul. As I thought of these witnesses Senator Dirksen continued I wondered where the pastors were. I wondered where the shepherds of the flock were. I wondered where the ministers were. All those who sit at bedside to comfort the sick who come to bereaved homes to comfort those who have been bereaved. Those who have constant contact with their flock. Those who minister to the spiritual needs of the common man. Where are they? Senator Dirksen told out the consequences of the Supreme Court decision barring prayer in public schools. A Dayton schoolteacher phoned the senator on

a Sunday morning and said that he was discharged because he taught his pupils honor thy father and thy mother. Grace that was said before meals was outlawed in some schools. In Minnesota baccalaureate sermons were suspended in all state schools. No nativity scenes were allowed in Denver. I was one voluntary prayer if that's what the youngsters want. So that they can participate no coercion and no school board or school authority to draft the form or the text of a prayer. I keep it just as free from all those impediments as possible. So there can be no violation of the so-called first part of the First Amendment which speaks of an establishment of religion. This goes only to the second part the free exercise of prayer. That's what it amounts to.

When Dirksen spoke out, strange business in the schools. What are we coming to? This is all a part of the pattern and they do not sleep. They do not rest. They do not tarry in their efforts. They mean business. Well, we are just a little asleep. Well, perhaps it's somewhat anti-climactical to report the two days after Dirksen's aeration the school prayer amendment failed to attain the necessary two-thirds vote for passage. There were 49 yeas, 37 nays and 14 senators did not vote. Senator Dirksen got to his feet in the Senate. He said, Mr. President, may I say that the crusade for the school amendment was carried on in the best spirit. It will continue. It will be far better organized throughout the country. Next time we wrestle with a question of voluntary prayer in our public schools. Senator Dirksen's next time has arrived. I'm Jack Maidley, reporting for WTTW in Chicago. It's by no means certain that Dirksen will get his way in this Congress any more than

he did in the last one. He has important and vocal support but so do his adversaries. The pattern varies from faith to faith and from region to region. Most Catholic spokesmen decried the 1963 decision. Members of the Jewish faith welcomed it. Protestants were and are divided. Many individuals, especially members of fundamentalist denominations, want to restore school prayers, but the national leaders of some major denominations definitely do not, nor does the National Council of Churches. Pro-prayer sentiment is most widespread in the south and in rural areas. But there is no uniformity of opinion anywhere. Reports now from Nashville, Boston, and New York. I'm Eugene Dietz reporting from WDCN TV. Some people refer to Nashville as the Protestant Vatican of America. This is a fitting title, I suppose. That is, any one city could claim to be the focal point of anything as diversified as the collection of religious forces

called Protestant. Here, for example, we found the World Headquarters of the Southern Baptist Convention, which is America's biggest Protestant church. It has almost 11 million members. The Methodist Church was ten and a half million members, the second only to the Baptist among the Protestant churches, and more the governing offices of that church are in Nashville than in any other city of the country. Also, we have in Nashville the central offices of elements of numerous other denominations, and the non-denominational Venerable University Divinity School. One of Venerable's authorities on the Supreme Court ruling is Dr. James Thomas Laney, Assistant Professor of Christian Ethics. Dr. Laney, what is your opinion of the US Supreme Court ruling regarding prayer in the public schools? I'd say, Gene, first of all, that it reflects the growing secularization of American life that there is a questioning of the so-called inherited Protestant ethos, which has been taken

for granted in most of the country. What do you think of willful violation of the Supreme Court ruling? Well, I think any willful violation of the law is reprehensible, and I think there are certain recourses due process litigation, which can be undertaken, but I think that it flagrant abuse of the law, no matter how much we may disagree with it, it has no legitimate place in a free society. Dr. Laney, what is your opinion of the Turks and the men? On the whole, I think Senator Dirkson's amendment, apart from its particular formulation, is really an attempt to recapture a lost ethos of America that has passed. And I think that for that reason, it will fail. Many people bemoan and lament this loss, that is, they're concerned about the increasing secularity of life. In many ways, I share some of these concerns, but I don't think that amendment

is the proper way to attack the problem or solve it. The Dirkson amendment also disturbs Dr. Porter Ruth, the Executive Secretary of the Southern Baptist Executive Committee. He's trying to solve a problem which does not exist, and I'm afraid that in doing this, that you might introduce some new and greater problems than exists. One of the things that concerns me about the language of the amendment is his term non-denominational prayer. Now, who's going to define what is a non-denominational prayer? Does this mean that you cannot pray in the name of Jesus? Just what does it mean? I think this is a matter. Really, one of the problems is that there has been such a case law built up around the First Amendment. That when you start re-opening, this means that you re-open all of these cases, and in this, you have real problems. And you would say, leave it alone. Where it is now, is that right? My own feeling at the present

time is that it would be better to leave the First Amendment as it is at the present time. This is the action that was taken by the Southern Baptist Convention in 1964 and reaffirmed last year in Detroit. The Reverend Thomas J. Van Loon, in charge of ecumenical relations for the Methodist Church, thinks a way must be found to teach a child about religion without imposing the doctrine of a church on students in the public classrooms. I see this as one of the potentially most important kinds of things, providing opportunity for teaching about religion. I must say also it is one of the least developed of the opportunities that we have. Can you imagine having an understanding of the Middle Ages without any real attention being paid to the religious forces which would work and which shaped the life of the Middle Ages? Mr. Van Loon, what do you think of the Turks and the Amendment? Well, I feel that the Turks and the Amendment is not needed,

that it might lead to considerable difficulty and mischief, and that I personally am opposed to it. Fries are not needed. Well, because it seems to me that the Constitution, as presently interpreted, has quite adequate safeguards on the matter of religious freedom and religious liberty. Obviously, no religious leader can speak for all members of his denomination on any issue, and particularly on anything as a motion pact as to whether or not a child should pray in school. One thing is abundantly clear. Many of our clergymen believe that it is imperative that youngsters be exposed to the contributions of religion to Western culture, and they believe that school is a good place to do this. But these same religious leaders are equally strong in their belief that it is wrong to thrust the doctrine of any church into the minds of captive youngsters seated

at a public school desk. It will be a long time, if ever, before any general agreement is reached as to what sort of religious instruction should be there. As elsewhere, Catholics in the city of Boston are troubled by society's ills. They worry about earth control, abortion, obscene motion pictures, pornographic literature. Surprisingly enough, one thing they leave for the John Birch Society to worry about is a Supreme Court decision banning prayer in schools. Over 35,000 Catholic kids attend the numerous parochial schools in Boston, where large doses of religious training are administered as part of the curriculum. Obviously, for these children, the prayer decision has had no impact whatsoever. The remaining Catholic children who cannot go to parochial schools attend public schools,

where prayer reading is no longer fashionable or even legal. All these children get is a small helping of something called a moment of silence, which comes packaged with the usual patriotic incantations. For most teachers in public schools, the elimination of the daily prayer has gone without incident, even in schools with a predominantly Catholic enrollment. In September, of course, I spent some time in telling them what the purpose was of the meditation period, and some of them would finish ahead of time. And gradually, they got to realize that it was a full minute, and some of them would say, oh, I could say five-hour fathers, or some of them would say, oh, I could say the prayer, my mother teaches me three times,

or some of them said, I was thinking about how I was going to be better because I heard talk about brotherhood last night. It was that sort of thing. I think it took it according to their religious belief. We asked Boston School Superintendent William Aronberger, if he thought the tradition of observing certain religious holidays in the public schools, was inconsistent with the Supreme Court decision. I would say that if there is an inconsistency as far as prayer is concerned, I think it's our duty as school administrators to observe all the national holidays, and thinking perhaps in terms of the Christmas and Hanukkah season. We in the Boston Public Schools have these observed not as religious holidays, but as national holiday. This is the season of goodwill. We have displays, we have Christmas trees, but incidentally, if any parent objects to having a child participate in this program,

he may withdraw the child from this phase of our educational observation. Long before the Supreme Court banned prayer from the schoolroom, Massachusetts religious leaders were convinced that such recitals were a pitifully small gesture. They set about reinforcing spiritual education by arranging to have a state law passed, which allowed children to leave public school for one hour a week to attend religious training classes. These children are the fourth, fifth, and sixth graders who regularly attend the Henry grew school in Hyde Park. Every Friday afternoon, all 116 of them go down the street to the most precious blood parochial school for an hour of religious training. Another group of 18 Protestants attend similar classes in a nearby church. A voice from the cloud said,

this is my beloved son. While an hour of intensive religious training a week would seem to be much better than a daily reading of the Lord's Prayer, even this measure is not completely satisfactory to the right Reverend Russell Novello, the man in charge of the release time program for the Archdiocese. I think one of the basic difficulties in the program is the actual amount of instruction time that is available. The youngsters are released for a period, but by the time they're escorted from a public school to the parish facility where they're going to be instructed by the time they're quieted down, attendance is taken, and materials are got out and so forth. Why a good deal of the instructional time has been wasted, so that I think many of the teachers consider them very fortunate if they have perhaps 15 to 20 minutes of actual instruction time. I think that's a very serious defect. On the other hand, though, we're very grateful

in most instances that we have released time because some parents would not see that their youngsters got any religious instruction except that it's so readily made available to them through the release time program. Paul Benzekwin, writing in the Boston Globe, lamented the Supreme Court decision with these lines. Now I sit me down in school, where praying is against the rule. Any prayer or class recites now violates the bill of rights. In silence alone can we meditate, and if God should get the credit, great. All I ask is a minute of quiet. If I feel like praying, then maybe I'll try it. If not, O Lord, this plea I make, should I die in school, my soul you'll take. But most Bostonians, Catholic or not, would agree with Roger Williams, who was expelled from

Massachusetts in 1636. He wrote, when papists, Protestants, Jews, and Turks are embarked in one ship. I plead that none of the papists, Protestants, Jews, or Turks, be forced to come to the ship's prayers. This is Russ Morage reporting for WGBH TV, Boston. That's pretty much the way most of us started school, but there's a difference. The children

who attend public school 59 in Manhattan don't join in prayer. This is author Albert reporting for WNDT New York. Our school systems in the metropolitan area, New York nearby New Jersey and Connecticut, complying with the Supreme Court decisions banning prayer in the public schools, or is there defiance? Edwin J. Lucas, in general counsel to the American Jewish Committee for purposes of this report, he surveyed compliance in our area. Within a reasonable time after the court came down, the larger cities began complying by which I mean they abstained from opening

clasps or assemblies with a prayer. The smaller institutions, as to say the schools in smaller communities, were much, much slower. And in some places, even now, continue to recite prayer, not compulsively, but voluntarily, whatever that means. And the reason for that is that you can police the situation in the larger communities, but as you go away from the larger communities, effort to police, as well as the ability to police, becomes correspondingly smaller. But attention here is turning away from prayer and toward another role for religion in the public school. Author Fleming, president of the National Council of Churches, is prominent among those urging the study of religion. No New York area public school is yet teaching about religious tenets, but Mamaranek High School in suburban Westchester has just introduced an

English class on the Bible as literature. John Turner, the teacher, spent all of last summer researching the course. But here you have a picture of Moses, and I think the most interesting thing to so many people is the head. You see what he has on top of his head? John, the horns. Now, the reason for that is very simple. The question of the translation of the vocated edition of the Bible. When St. Jerome was translating the Bible, he had a problem, which any Hebrew scholar would have. When St. Jerome was translating the Bible, he came to a word which means raised, which is just like the word which means horns. So when I said that Moses, when he saw God, smile, and there was a great appearance that he had after this stations with God, St. Jerome thought it was the word horns, so he put horns on Michelangelo. That's the reason that you have this sculpture the way it is. Mr. Turner says the aim of the course is to help

students become familiar with the Bible so that they may trace religious influences in art, literature, music, and society in general. To who the person is and what he must do. Now, could we just take a look please on page 16? In the first paragraph of page 16, we have God speaking to Abraham. I was wondering, John, will you, John, will you be just that please? Yes, now the word. Now the Lord said on the age of time, if the hour about a country, did that come to you? John Turner's class at Bameranek is hardly controversial, but it might be if it systematically taught the tenets of the major religions. And that is what some clergymen and educators suggest. We spoke to representatives of the major religious organizations. First, Rabbi Gilbert Epstein of the New York Board of Rabbis.

We feel that the religion should be taught in the home. The religion should be taught in a school associated with a church or synagogue, but that it has no place in the public school system. Then the long run this would only prove to be divisive and not helpful at all. And we are also very much concerned about the question of who would be the people teaching of this subject. Would they be competent enough? What type of texts might be used? But all the writing of this consideration is the very fundamental question of the fact that religion should be taught by parents and by the church or synagogue. My senior John P. Braini is principal of the Cardinal Spellman High School in the Bronx. It should not be shied away from in the public school classroom. I think we should encourage our teachers to speak about religion and teach about religion when it arises naturally in the

curriculum. I don't think that on the elementary and secondary levels there need be any special or separate courses, but wherever religion is to be given attention in English and art, social studies and other subjects, then such attention should be given. And if our teachers need preparation and I'm quite sure they do, then we should be making the effort to prepare them in this respect. Dan Potter of the Protestant Council. Knowing that this is permissive and even in some ways encouraged by the Supreme Court decision, we have to find a way to do this. And among the problems are the problem of leadership, who will do the teaching, the matter of textbooks, what books give fair treatment to all different religions, so that when it is presented, it will not favor one religion over against another, but try to be objective. But these are questions

that are faced in many different subjects of teaching, and there is nothing in the subject content that would make it impossible to find solutions to these problems. Clearly, the religious establishment is far from united on the wisdom of teaching about religion in the public schools. And the schools in May safely be said will move very slowly, fearful that they may not teach about religion well and fearful of community misunderstanding. In some large school districts in our area are complying with the Supreme Court decisions, some rural districts are not. As for teaching about religion, well it's still a plan, not reality. Author Albert WNDT, New York. Many critics of the school prayer decision are people who dislike the present Supreme Court generally and who disliked especially its school lease aggregation ruling nine years earlier. Ironically,

however, some Negro school officials also deplore the prayer decision, an offbeat report from a Southern community. I'm Sylvan Meyer, WGTV University of Georgia Television. We're in Carrollton, Georgia at an all Negro school integrated only to the extent of one white teacher. The principal is LS Malette, who is carrying on the same practices in regard to prayer in the classrooms as he did before the Supreme Court decision. Having prayer in the morning through the children is a tremendous importance to the college students because we've used prayer in our life to overcome obstacles. That's all the thing, even slavery itself. They take part, they do it themselves, they like to repeat the law's prayer, they like to read the prayer short to reverse the script

and read the lease to the flag and some of them like to sing a song that's just affectionate with them. The Lord of my shepherd, I shall not want. He meant to me to lie down in green pastures. He led me beside the steel water. He restored my soul. He needed me in the pedal, writing for his name, saying, ye do I walk through the valley of the shadow of death. I will fill no evil for thawed with me. Thawed, and thou stest they come from me. Thawed, and I will pass, they tell me for me in the presence of my enemy. Thawed, and I know it's my head with awe. My cut running over. Surely goodness and righteousness are following me all the days of my life.

I will dwell in the house of the Lord forever. I have asked me to put it there so, let us pray. We have a great respect for the supreme law of our land, but they can make mistakes, which is shown by the Dred Scott decision and also the decision on separate of equal school cited. They have reversed themselves on that so that they could be wrong. I feel they are wrong. They are just mad at it by the prayers of the public schools. Do you feel there is some special need on the part of the Negro child for prayer in the school? Absolutely. The Negro,

that's all on the only weapon he had for nearly a hundred years in slavery. And it's like songs that steal away the Jesus and nobody knows the tumble I see. It's me, it's me, it's me, all the Lord standing in the plan. I don't have a great many of them. So this is part of the heritage? Absolutely. It's part of the heritage for my people. They still have that, they don't want to get rid of that. And I feel very deeply that the court didn't quite understand it because the separate equal law they passed, you know, he has 50 years ago, which kept Negroes in one school and white and another school. Well now they found out that was wrong and they have abolished dual systems of public school, maybe no Negro school in white school. And of course the Dred Scott decision which said that Negroes were property. That was all a change when I believe spring court will change this judgment too in the future because it does invade this spiritual connection with the inner man in his

God. I would like to see him have a law of guaranteeing prayer, just like we have guarantee the worst of religion. Since prayer is that, that's the only means for which we convert the law to prayer. That's all the way away. I don't want anybody to curb it or to stop it by law. Mr. Millett's interpretation, that school prayer contributes to a degree of racial cohesiveness is unusual. Other than that around the southeast, the Supreme Court decision is generally observed in the breach. In Georgia, the state school superintendent sent out a letter explaining the decision, but placed no bans. In Atlanta, broadcasting prayer over the school, loudspeakers, was stopped. Otherwise, throughout the area schools everywhere are bootlegging moments of inspiration. It all boils down, I suppose, to which decisions of the Supreme Court you decide

to follow. When his amendment came to a roll call, as September, Senator Dirksen carried a substantial majority of the Senator's voting, but not the two-thirds majority needed to amend the Constitution. In January, the Senator reintroduced his measure in somewhat different form, but his sentence said little about it. No hearings have been scheduled. Senate action this year is considered highly unlikely, but Dirksen is powerful and resourceful, and the issue is important to him. He credits his own prayers with saving an eye his doctors condemned 18 years ago. Thus the controversy continues, but in many parts of the country, as we've seen in the last hour, school prayers also continue, officially prescribed or not. Good evening. This is NET.

The National Educational Television Network.