Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1962-07-20
View of High Bench

The subject which deserves
thoughtful consideration to-
day is not so much the Spe-
cific type of religious activity
involved in the New York
case as the whole question of
the relationship between reli-
gion and Government under
the American constitutional
system. Justice Douglas
frankly comprehensive ap-
proach in Engel v. WHALE has
placed the issue in it's entire
ty squarely before the public.
The reprint in The Star on
July l, 1862, of an editorial
from the American Bar Asso-
citation Journal relative to an
earlier decision, constituted
a most timely, Just, and ap-
propriate commentary upon
this broader question.
The Introduction in that
earlier case of religious in
Struction in the public schools
was, in my opinion, of even
more serious consequence
than the recent ban on vol
untary, nondenominational
prayer. Can a well-ronded
and vital education exclude
the opportunity for instruc-
ton in the spiritual and
ethical heritage of ones peo-
pie? If not, then how can
that instruction be at once
more effective and more
democratic than where in
tegrated on a regular basis
into the overall educational
program, made readily avail
able to all but mandatory for
none, and offered in diverse
forms appropriate for vary
ing religious backgrounds
and beliefs? The right to
dissent, to adhere to a mi
nority creed or uphold an in
dividual conviction, would be
fully honored in principle
and in practice. Surely it is
not in the covering up, cloak
ing or soft-pedaling of diff
ferences-political, cultural,
religious, or individual-that
the ideals of a free society
are best taught and realized;
it is rather in their open,
unconStrained expression and
acceptance, in a spirit of
mutual liberation, respect,
and good will.
Should provision cease to
be made for "the free exer-
else" Of religion by members
of the armed forces, where
ever or in whatsoever remote
or difficult places they may
be stationed? Should the in
mates of the country's pris-
ons be denied access to the
help and redeeming power
which may be derived from
religious services? Neither
the rigorous exclusion of reli-
gious activity from the many
important areas in which
Government operates today,
on the one hand, nor the
denial of governmental ac-
ton or aid in all instances
where the churches are max
ing constructive contribu-
tons, on the other, would
best serve the needs and well
fare Of the people. The CO.
operation of church and
state in those sectors of
modern life in which both
have a rightful concern, and
in which both can play q
beneficial role, is desirable
from the moral, educational,
human, and practical stand
points. There should be no
constitutional prohibition
upon such cooperation, pro-
vided it is free and voluntary
on the part of the church,
the state, and the individuals
affected, and provided no one
religious group is accorded a
preferred or privileged posi-
ton.
The acknowledgment in
the Declaration of Independ-
ence of the religious founda-
ton of the Nations Govern
ment, the phraseology and
historical context of the First
Amendment and the absence
(noted by Justice Stewart) of
reference anywhere in the
Constitution to a wall of
separation" between church
and state, all support the
conclusion that the polestar
of the courts decisions should
be not an extreme and rigid
pattern of separation, but
the reality of freedom and
equal treatment.
Kemp P. Marlborough,
st. Mary's City, Maryland.