Universal prayer(s) can be dull, farcical, and superficial

Nov 03, 2021 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

Kaieteur News – I write to express my opinion on the issue of prayers in public schools. I concur with Swami Aksharananda and Ferlin Pedro in their call for religious neutrality in public institutions. My concurrence is prompted by the Ministry of Education’s insistence that the prayer recited at an organised event hosted by the Ministry is a “universal” one. I fully agree that Christian-themed prayers have no place in our public institutions, particularly our public schools.
Swami Aksharananda contends that the prayer recited at the organised event hosted by the Ministry of Education was a Christian-themed prayer. The Swami would agree with me that, apart from the reference “heavenly father” and the Christian signature “amen”, the word “God” in the rest of the prayer is a non-translatable religious category for the Hindu. The word “God” fails to express the all-expansive ultimate reality in Hindu philosophy that creates all, lives in all, and transcends all. To translate it as Brahman or Ishwara diminishes its meaning, while evoking a monotheistic personal deity in the Judeo-Christian sense. This is another example of the theological incompatibilities of the “universal” prayer used by the Ministry, making its religious value questionable. Moreover, any official “non-denominational,” “inter-denominational,” or “universal” prayer written and sanctioned by the government risks expressing the theme of the dominant religion in our society.
Prayer is such a vast and multifaceted subject that one instantly recognises the impossibility of even lightly touching on all its aspects in one official prayer, without the risk of offending other religious persuasions. Prayer reflects a person’s theological position about prayer and his metaphysical commitments that informs his religious worldview. Because of this, any official prayer written and sanctioned by the Ministry of Education has questionable religious value. Additionally, the religious value of a “universal” prayer is questionable because it promotes a religious experience that conveys none of the theological substance, depth, and/or historic witness of any particular religion. Such a prayer is dull, farcical and superficial. Prayer has a defined purpose in any religion, and there are many forms of prayers that have spiritually nurtured the adherents of various religions throughout the centuries, but not one of them has been a “universal” prayer.
Apart from this, why are prayers in public schools necessary? Some are of the opinion that the use of prayers in public schools provides for the nurture of morality and the cultivation of religious experience in children. John M. Fraser expressed this opinion in his letter (SN 28/10/2021). Furthermore, he posited that “religion is both a source of knowledge regarding the ideals of morality and a source of strength to help them put those ideals into practice.” I do not disagree that religion is a source of moral knowledge; however, it is not the only source of moral knowledge. The moral landscape can be surveyed by using our rational faculties free of any religious commitment. Our ability to reason can be the basis of morality. Furthermore, moral laws can be justified by a moral intuition based upon utilitarian principles. Children do not need to be morally nurtured in public schools only by religion.
Nonetheless, I fail to see the value of prayer in public schools in creating a moral or ethical atmosphere for children. From a purely theological perspective, prayers of whatever kind in public schools are not essential to the cultivation of morality or religion in children, for it is not an instrument to be used by those who wish to inculcate either in children or to moralise public education. Rather, it is a spiritual discipline developed from one’s personal devotion and experience with the divine according to one’s religious commitments. It might be the case that the one who prays to a deity opens himself to be infused and transformed by divine goodness. It could also be said that prayer is an avenue for such infusion and transformation. However, the intent of adopting and mandating an official prayer in public schools is central to this issue and should remain in view. For the Ministry of Education to have a policy officially prescribing when and what children should pray amounts to religious coercion in public schools.
And concerning the nurture of religious faith in children, which is often ritualistic in character, it belongs to the home and the child’s place of worship, not in public schools. The only exception to this is in private religious schools whose philosophy of education is informed and guided by their religious commitments. Now, if the religious value of a “universal” prayer is questionable and prayers of whatever kind in public schools are not essential to the cultivation of morality or religion in children, then why is the Ministry of Education interested in having a policy mandating prayers?

Ronald N. Emanuel

---

---