Is a prayer before a town meeting constitutional? That is a question the Supreme Court will be deciding. Earlier this month, the high court heard oral arguments on a case from Greece, New York. They begin their town board meetings with prayer from anyone who is willing to offer one. Most of the prayers are from Christians. But there have been a very small number from other faiths, like Wicca and Baha’i.

A local resident petitioned the board to stop praying altogether. The board refused and the case has now made it all the way to the Supreme Court because of the lower rulings. The Second Circuit Court ruled that the “steady drumbeat of Christian invocations violates the Constitution’s prohibition against government endorsement of religion.” Of course, that is not the fault of the town’s leaders. There are just a lot more Christians wanting to offer prayers than people from other religions.

David Cortman with the Alliance Defending Freedom has been one of the attorney’s representing the town of Greece, New York. He was on my radio program to explain the case. He believes that “community leaders should have the freedom to pray without being censored.” He and others who filed briefs in the case reminded the court that opening meetings in prayer has been a cherished tradition and religious freedom that even precedes the establishment of this republic.

In my office I have a poster of a painting that depicts the first time the Continental Congress met. They wanted to open in prayer but faced a choice of which pastor and denomination to choose. Samuel Adams said he was not a “bigot” and could hear a prayer from any man who loved his God and his country. The painting shows these men on their knees praying.

It is also worth noting that the same members of Congress who passed the First Amendment also were the ones who established the tradition of chaplains who open each session of Congress with prayer. And the Supreme Court has ruled in other cases that prayers before a meeting are constitutional. We should hope and pray that the justices on the Supreme Court remember these precedents as they consider how they will rule on this case.