City leaders are praying by the rules

Deirdre Newman

When Bishop David King of the Burbank stake of the Mormon church

uttered the name “Jesus Christ” during an invocation in 1999, little

did he know the ripple effect those traditional religious words would

have throughout the state.

Three years later, an appellate court found that his invocation

violated the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The reverberations hit Newport Beach and Costa Mesa earlier this

year when both cities altered the process of giving invocations to

prevent any liability.

While the changes have not stymied religious leaders, some on the

dais still question whether they infringe too much on freedom of

speech.

After Newport Beach passed a resolution that forbid clergy to

refer to a deity specific to a certain religion during invocations,

Mayor Tod Ridgeway, during a prayer breakfast, called the new rules

“an unfortunate event” and said it offended him that clergy couldn’t

say “Jesus Christ” anymore.

When asked to elaborate on his comments, he said what he really

meant was that he was offended because he believes the new guidelines

limit freedom of speech.

“I should have said, ‘How do you balance the establishment clause

versus the free speech clause?’” Ridgeway said. “That was really what

I meant. It’s offensive in the sense that I am truly a free speech

person in life. I was a constitutional lawyer for five years.”

It’s all in what you say

The ruling that lighted a fire under both cities occurred in

September 2002 when the 2nd District Court of Appeals upheld a Los

Angeles County Superior Court judge’s injunction banning sectarian

prayer at council meetings, based on a case in Burbank. In that case,

the judge ruled that chaplains who invoke “the name of Jesus Christ”

violate the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment because that

constitutes a sectarian prayer, sending a message that the Burbank

council is a Christian body. The establishment clause states:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,

or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” the basis for the multiple

court rulings on the separation of church and state.

While Newport Beach forbade the utterance of religion-specific

deities, Costa Mesa took a different tack.

In March, the Costa Mesa City Council took Councilman Allan

Mansoor’s recommendation and agreed to switch from an invocation to a

“moment of solemn expression.” The moment is less restrictive than a

prayer because the content and format are up to the speaker.

Moments of solemn expression can be in any format, like a speech

or a poem; contain any kind of secular or religious content,

including references to Jesus; and be given by a religious official

or a layperson.

Will every expression be a solemn one?

The Rev. Dennis Short is the only religious leader who has given

both an invocation and a moment of solemn expression since both

cities have made changes to the invocation process. Short’s church,

Harbor Christian Church, is in Newport Beach on the border of Costa

Mesa. He is also the president of the Newport-Mesa-Irvine Interfaith

Council.

The new guidelines in Newport Beach did not present any hurdles

since Short’s work with the Interfaith Council has motivated him to

be “inclusive in terms of my prayers,” he said.

For Costa Mesa’s moment of solemn expression, Short told a story

about a little boy who goes out to look for God and finds him in the

form of an old man on a park bench. Conversely, the old man believes

God is the little boy. This story is extremely relevant for Costa

Mesa, Short said.

“Essentially the last sentence is -- be careful how we treat each

other -- because it’s important that we treat everyone with respect,”

Short said. “Someone else may see God in you. And you know if you’ve

been following Costa Mesa city politics for a while, that message

hopefully was listened to.”

The only apprehension Short feels about the moments of solemn

expression is that it leaves more room for negativity, he said.

“I’m sure with some people’s frustrations who always get up and

talk, they will have a solemn expression that nails one of the

council members,” Short said. “I think it could get out of hand. So

my hunch is sometimes it will be very positive and uplifting or

inspirational and otherwise it may not be at all. Invocations can be

pretty flat and meaningless too.”

An easy rule to follow

The Rev. Peter Haynes, of St. Michael & All Angeles Episcopal

Parish Church, addressed the Newport Beach City Council in February.

He said he didn’t have a problem with the city’s new guidelines

because he’s used to giving prayers that don’t mention the name,

“Jesus Christ.”

“I’m used to doing prayers addressed to ‘wondrous God’ or

‘gracious lovers of souls’, without Jesus or Christ or God or the

Father or Allah or any specific references like that,” Haynes said.

His issue with invocations, though, is that he feels the council

members themselves should give them, since they are the ones who are

the most active participants in the meetings.

“My idea of prayer is for people that are regularly involved in

the activities,” Haynes said. “We pray before we eat a meal. We pray

during worship services of which we’re a part. We pray at times of

our lives when we, or those we love, are in need or celebrating.”

The Rev. George Crisp , of Christ Church by the Sea, said he

didn’t even look at the new guidelines before giving an invocation at

a Newport Beach City Council meeting in February, since the

guidelines only confirm what he already practices.

“I’ve always been one of those people who believes that’s a forum

in which you are somewhat generic in the way you approach your

prayers so you are inclusive of as many people as possible without

offending anyone,” Crisp said. “So I’ve never used specific names for

God or referred to Jesus.”

Free speech protection is a balancing act

Yet Ridgeway said he is still bothered with the way the city

balanced the establishment clause with freedom of speech, especially

since someone could still refer to a deity during the public comment

portion of the meetings.

“If you come up during public comment time, which we could put on

right after a potential invocation, 10 people could come up and say

whatever they want for three minutes, including a prayer to Allah, or

Mohammad or public comment including Jesus,” Ridgeway said.

Mansoor believes the moment of solemn expression is the best way

to maintain free speech.

“I think it was the only way to go, in my opinion,” Mansoor said.

“The policy became necessary to preserve our right to free speech, as

a result of the court’s narrow and restrictive ruling.”

Mansoor said he doesn’t share Short’s concern about someone using

a moment in a negative way.

“I haven’t seen any evidence of that, but we’ll certainly assess

it as time goes on,” Mansoor said.

Burbank ultimately took the same approach as Newport Beach.

Burbank Mayor Stacey Murphy agrees with Ridgeway that restricting the

use of certain expressions limits freedom of speech. But the council

is not going to pursue the issue to the state Supreme Court, Murphy

said.

“We’ve spent all the time and effort and money we feel we can

spend as a city on it, but we do feel it’s a shame,” Murphy said.

* DEIRDRE NEWMAN covers Costa Mesa. She may be reached at (949)

574-4221 or by e-mail at deirdre.newman@latimes.com.