Wiccan wins case outlawing 'Jesus' prayers at town meetings By John H. Adams The Layman Online Thursday, August 26, 2004 A member of a pagan sect has succeeded in convincing a federal court that serves part of the Bible belt – Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina – to disallow prayers offered in the name of Jesus at meetings of public bodies. The ruling was made by the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals in favor of the complaint by Darla K. Wynne, who calls herself a Wiccan, which is another name for witch. She complained that town council members in Great Falls, S.C., typically began their meetings with prayers in the name of Jesus, demonstrating a bias toward Christianity. Her supporters in the case included the American Jewish Congress and Americans for Separation of Church and State – groups with which the Presbyterian Church (USA) has allied in numerous church/state cases. Mayor Henry Clayton Starnes acknowledged in his testimony during the federal trial of the case that a council member would typically offer the following prayer before its meetings: Our Heavenly Father we are here tonight to discuss town business. We ask that you would clear up our minds and our hearts from animosity that we might face these issues and address them with an open mind tonight. We pray that all decisions made tonight would be most beneficial for the town and the citizens. In Christ's name we pray. Amen (in unison). The appellate court said, "During the prayers, the court found that 'citizens attending the meetings customarily stand and bow their heads.' The record also contains uncontroverted evidence that residents of the Town participated in the prayers by saying 'amen' at the end." During the trial of the case, Wynne testified that she attended the town council meetings regularly since 1999. She said she initially stood and bowed her head to keep from being "on the spot" and out of respect for others. But she eventually decided to protest the Christian prayers at a council meeting. "Finally, at a Council meeting in late 2000, Wynne objected to the Town Council's practice of referring to 'Jesus,' 'Christ,' or 'Jesus Christ' in its prayers," the court said. "As an alternative, she 'proposed that the prayer's references be limited to "God"' or, instead, 'that members of different religions be invited to give prayers.'" The appellate court added, "The district court found that Mayor Starnes responded at the meeting 'to the effect that: "'This is the way we've always done things and we're not going to change.'" Wynne's request prompted a ruckus in the small town, population 2,100, that is 45 miles from Charlotte, N.C. Ministers drafted resolutions favoring continuance of a Christian prayer. Petitions were circulated. About 100 residents attended a council meeting in February 2001 as opposed to the usual five or six and heard the standard Christian prayer offered by a town board member. They responded with a chorus of "amens" and "hallelujahs." In the face of growing opposition, including being accused of being a "Satanist," Wynne said she felt uncomfortable continuing to attend the town board meetings. She filed her complaint in federal district court on August 20, 2001. On July 11, 2003, the district court enjoined the council "from invoking the name of a specific deity associated with any one specific faith or belief in prayers given at Town Council meetings." The council appealed the ruling. The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals issued its ruling on July 22. "Whatever else the Establishment Clause may mean (and we have held it to mean no official preference even for religion over nonreligion), it certainly means at the very least that government may not demonstrate a preference for one particular sect or creed (including a preference for Christianity over other religions)," the appeals court said. "The clearest command of the Establishment Clause is that one religious denomination cannot be officially preferred over another. There have been breaches of this command throughout this Nation's history, but they cannot diminish in any way the force of the command." The court declared that the Great Falls Town Council had "crossed the constitutional line … The Supreme Court has long made clear that the Constitution prohibits any such displays of 'denominational preference.'" Furthermore, the court said, government-sponsored endorsement of religion is out of order – "even when no legal coercion is present, and indeed even when no ersatz, 'peer-pressure' psycho-coercion is present …" The court indicated that the council would have had a better case if it had made an effort to "balance its exclusively Christian references" with other deities. "In fact, the Council has never invoked a deity associated with any specific faith other than Christianity."

Respond to this article

Home · Archives · The Layman · PLC Publications Presbyterian Lay Committee · Feedback · Links