God Is Part and Parcel of the Constitution : School prayer: Piety is at the core of both the federal and states’ constitutions, so why not allow prayer in school? : We are a religious people, whose institutions presuppose a supreme being.--Justice William O. Douglas

There is no better way to confirm Justice Douglas’ aphorism than to take a tour through the state constitutions. Forty-seven of the 50 states have preambles invoking the name of almighty God.

A joint resolution of Congress could declare that children in public schools might lawfully recite voluntary prayers employing only such acknowledgment of divine power and goodness as is present in their own state constitution or in the constitutions of any of the other states. When this resolution is signed by the President--and it is difficult to imagine any reason to object to it--it could take effect immediately. It is also difficult to imagine that the Supreme Court could take exception to such a resolution, for to do so would require it, in effect, to declare the state constitutions unconstitutional.

Consider the perfectly nonsectarian piety embodied in the fundamentallaws of the states:

“We the people of Alabama . . . invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish. . . .”

“We the people of the State of California, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure and perpetuate its blessings, do establish this Constitution.”

“The people of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good providence of God, in having permitted them to enjoy a free government. . . .”

This selection illustrates the consistency in the patterns of all the preambles. Who could ask more in a school prayer than to acknowledge that it is through divine providence that we enjoy our civil and religious liberty, and that we reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance on God to preserve and perpetuate it?

It is notable that the state constitutions have provisions equivalent to the “no establishment” and “free exercise” clauses of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. One example that will suffice for present purposes is that of California:

“Free exercise and enjoyment of religion without discrimination or preference are guaranteed. This liberty of conscience does not excuse acts that are licentious or inconsistent with the peace and safety of the State. The legislature shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”

From this, it is apparent that the states have seen no inconsistency between the guarantees of religious freedom in their constitutions and the expressions of gratitude to God for the enjoyment of that freedom in the same constitutions.

American constitutions, whether federal or state, rest ultimately upon the theology of the Declaration of Independence. This fact has been obscured by the domination of a legal positivism which is simply unable to understand the relationship between natural and divine law on the one hand and human law on the other. Yet this relationship was axiomatic for our founding fathers. If, however, we ask why we have an obligation--a moral duty--to obey the laws, either of our state or of the United States, there is only one answer. It is because those laws exist “to secure these rights,” rights with which we have been “endowed by [our] Creator.”

Constitutional governments have no other purpose but to render valuable rights whose origin is altogether independent of human will, rights that are unalienable because they are fixed eternally in “the laws of nature and of nature’s God.” Many governments that did not respect the rights of the individual have claimed to be based upon the consent of the governed. But the consent of the governed required by our Republican constitutions is derived from the equal and unalienable rights of each human person.

It can be seen that the rights secured to us by the human law, whether of the states or of the United States, are means of implementing antecedent rights whose origin is in a supreme being. It is difficult to imagine how we can teach citizenship to future citizens without inculcating in them an understanding of and a reverence for this origin.