\ "
jhe Canadian 6
VOL XLIV
4
GASDENVALE,
Faf-Rcaching U. S. Supreme Court Ruling To Separate Public Schools From State
Is Triumph For
1> i^UCX-fT
i$h WeeUy
er
In
Civil Liberties Forces
Roman Catholic and some Protestant church leaders expressed shock and regret over the U. S. Supreme Court's ruling that the recitation of official state prayers in public schools was unconstitutional.
Opposition from the Roman Catholic Church was swift. Cardinal Spellman was extremely critical of the decision. Protestant churchmen appeared split over the decision. But the New York Board of Rabbis hailed the decision, says the New York Times. The board, which describes itself as the largest representative Rabbinic body in the world, declared:
"The recitation of prayers in the public schools, which is tantamount to the teaching of prayer, is not in conformity with the spirit of the American concept of the separation of church and state. All the religious groups in this country will best advance their respective-faiths by adherence to this principle."
The Supreme Court decision on the prayer written and authorized by the State Board of Regents is expected to have far-reaching repercussions in the American schools.
However, educators and civil-liberties advocates were divided in their attempts to predict whether the effect would be automatic or whether there would be a rash of tests of the extent of the ruling's influence.
These reactions ranged from an expression of "disappointment" over the ruling by Chancellor Edgar W. Couper, of the Board of .Regents, to a triumphant prediction of "tremendous effect all over the country" by George E. Rund-
Siist, executive director of the ew York Civil Liberties Union. "The court's decision is in no way an attack on religion," Mr. Rund-quist said. "It simply makes crystal clear that a state-written and imposed prayer has no place in the public schools."
Dr. James E. Allen Jr., New York State Commissioner of Education, expressed no opinion on the ruling itself but said that he would instruct the schools in New York State to comply with the law.
Dr. Sterling M. McMurrin, United States Commissioner of Education, when reached in Washington, said that he believed the ruling would affect the use of prayers in the public schools everywhere. "It doesn't seem to me that it is an earth-shaking decision but it is one I don't object to," he said, reports the New York Times. He added that he had no strong views about the matter.
"I believe it is no loss to religion but may be a gain in clarifying matters," he said. "Prayer that is essentially a ceremonial classroom function has not much religious value."
In Chicago, Dean M. Kelly, director of the National Council of Churches' Department of Religi-
WRITE OR
CALL FOR PROSPECTUS
FORGET & FORGET LTD.
Financial Manning Division, 2070 St. Luk* SfrMt,
Motitr#ol 25 WL 7-2*11-2-3-4
Pteost tend free LVeyfus Fund Information.
name .....................�.........�.....�
Address ....
Ofy & Prov.........................,..
ous Liberty, said, "Many Christians will welcome this decision."
"It protects the religious rights of minorities," he said, "and guards against the development of 'public school religion' which is neither Christianity or Judaism but something less than either."
Ray J. Harmelink, associate general secretary of the Presbyterian Board of Christian Education, called the decision "almost inevitable in the light of similar decisions by the Court." He said he agreed with the ruling.
In Atlanta, Methodist Bishop John Own disagreed with the finding. "I feel a non-sectarian prayer, one which all our religious denominations could approve, certainly is a good thing and should be approved," he said.
A. M. Sonnabend, president of the American Jewish Committee, said that the ruling "affirmed that prayer in our democratic society is a matter for the home, synagogue and church, and not for state institutions."
The Anti-Defamation League of Bnai Brith called the ruling "a splendid reaffirmation of a basic American principle" and said it "adds another safeguard for freedom of religion in the United States."
Sen. Jacob K. Javits, Republican, of New York, said there "is plenty of opportunity afforded to parents to inculcate religious faith in their children at home and at week-end religious schools."
Leo Pfeffer, general counsel for the American Jewish Congress, said that across the country about 30 per cent of all schools practiced a "morning flyto^frnaV* usually- in the form of the � �*ord'# Prayer, says the New York Times. He said that between 40 and 50 per cent of all schools practiced Bible reading, and about one-fifth of the 35,-000 school districts required the teaching "about religion," frequently without sectarian emphasis. He said he believed the ruling would make such teaching also unconstitutional.
Mr. Pfeffer said that approximately 85 per cent of all baccalaureate services in the public schools had some religious content.
A 1956 survey by the National Education Association showed that at least five states�Arkansas, Delaware, Maine, New Jersey and North Dakota�authorized by statute the recitation of the Lord's Prayer or the teaching of the ten commandments.'; It found that about half of tie states had laws that required oir permitted Bible reading in public schools.
A nation-wide sampling in 1961 of 2,000 school districts on "The Extent of Religious Influence in American Public Schools" showed that 33.16 per cent of the districts required "homeroom devotional services" the educational description for classroom prayer, in all schools; and 17.06 per cent required such services in some schools.
The prayer was drafted by the New York Board of Regents and recommended for recital aloud by teachers and children in each classroom at the start of every school day. It is non-denominational and just twenty-two words long. It reads:
"Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence tapon Thee, and we beg Thy blessing upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country."
By a vote of 6 to 1 the court held that the reading of the prayer was "an establishment of religion" forbidden by the First Amendment to the Constitution.
But the impact of the decision goes far beyond the New York prayer. The dear implication of the ruling was that any religious ceremony promoted by the state in public schools would be suspect, says the New York Times. That would include, for example, reading of verses from the Bible�a
fractice now *nder challenge in ennsylvania. :
A recent surrey indicated that about half of tit public school systems in the United States had such religious eerenttaies. This is most common in the South, where almost three-fourths of the public schools have djapel exercises and Bible-readings. *
Thus, the U. S. Supreme Court decision weald have * major and controversial fcnpact on pubtie school practices across the country. And beyond that, it might indicate a stricter attftudeln the Supreme Courlr toward breaches ct
n Rabbis Call On If.S To Send Food Surplus To Communist China; Bemoan t Of Soviet Jews
what it has called the "wall of sep* aration" between church and st*t�f;
. The prayer case was brought w five parents of children in the PUbV lie schools of New Hyde Park, liJp N.Y. Two of the parents were Jew* ish, one a member of the EthlcAj Culture- Society, one a Unitarian and one a non-believer. They said the form of the prayer conflicted with their religious beliefs.
The highest New York State court, the Court of Appeals, rejected their protest against -the prayer by a vote of 6 to 2.
Justice Black wrote the opinion of the court in the prayer case. He was joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Tom C. Clark, John Marshall Harlan, and William J. Brennan Jr. Justice William O. Douglas concurred in a separate opinion.
Justice Potter Stewart was the sole dissenter. Not participating were Justices Felix Frankfurter, who is in the hospital, and Byron R. White, who joined the court after the case was argued.
In the majority opinion Justice Black wrote:
"Is is neither sacrilegious nor anti-religious to say that each separate government in this country should stay out of the business of writing   or   sanctioning   official
f>rayers and leave that purely re-igious function to the people themselves and to those the people choose to look to for religious guidance."
The complaint of the families who brought the case lies, as Jnt-
The Federal Government was asked by the-Central Conference of American Rabbis to explore the possibilities of sending surplus food to the mainland of Communist China. At the same time the Conference deplored what it described as the "unique discrimination and persecution" of Jews and Judaism in the Soviet Union, says the New York Times. The Conference represents more than 800 Reform rabbis in the United States and Canada.
In a resolution urging that part of the food surpluses in America be sent to mainland China, the rabbis said that there was acute suffering there and a condition verging on starvation for tens of millions of persons.
They said that the relief of human distress should not be contingent upon political agreement and that the suffering on the Chinese mainland was burdening their consciences.
J A second resolution called on the rfcbbis to "arouse public opinion t$ the unique discrimination and "persecution" of Jews in the Soviet Union. It charged the Soviet with " liberate attempts to "liquidate" ligious and cultural Judaism and assimilate Russian Jews by coercion. The resolution added:
"The arrest, conviction and execution of lay leaders of synagogues; the repeated anti-Semitic ^expressions in the Soviet press; the restrictions suffered by Jews jnake impossible any organizational and communal contact with their co-religionists in other parts of the
tice Black phrased it, was that the   ^rorld; and the denial of religious
prayer violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment be*� cause it was "composed by governmental officials as a part of a governmental officials as a part of a governmental program to further religious beliefs."
"We agree with that contention," Justice Black said, says the New York Times. "In this country it is no part of the business of government to compose official prayers for any group of the American people to recite."
School officials had argued that the prayer was inoffensive because parents who did not want their children to say it could get them excused. The children could then either leave the room or remain seated and silent while their classmates stood and prayed.
In New Hyde Park, only one child had sought to be excused since the prayer was adopted, in 1958.
Justice Black rejected this argument. He said, first, that placing "the power, prestige and financial support of government" behind a particular form of religious observance does tend to coerce religious minorities to conform.
But the purposes of banning "an establishment of religion go much further," Justice Black said. He declared that the clause "does not depend upon any showing of direct governmental compulsion and is violated by the enactment of laws which establish an official religion whether those laws operate directlv to coerce non-observing individuals or not."
In stating the opinion from the bench, Justice Black added these extemporaneous comments, says the New York Times:
"The prayer of each man from his soul must be his and his alone. That is the genius of the First Amendment.
"If there is any one thing clear in the First Amendment, it is that the right of the people to pray in their own way is not to be controlled by the election returns.**
Five parents who had been subjected to villification and community pressures because they brought suit against the Regents' school prayer expressed satisfaction with the Supreme Court decision.
The parents previously were generally reluctant to discuss the outcome of the suit because they got letters of denunciation and critical telephone calls after the suit was filed in State Supreme Court on Jan. 22, 1959. They said they were "extremely happy" about the decision.
They termed the twenty-two-word State Board of Regents prayer a violation of the First Amendment*, which prohibits governmental establishment of religion or interference with its free
Mrs. Lenore Lyons, of WUliston Park, the mother of four of the eleven children involved, said she was particularly pleased thai the
Articles such as Bibles, prayer .borilfr. prayer shawls, and matsohs
are matters seriously disturbing to our Conference."
6-1 decision declared the prayer unconstitutional represented both the "liberal and conservative thinking of the Supreme Court."
Monroe Lerner said that his child had remained "most often silent" during the prayer, but added that the decision had been left up to the child.
The mother of one of the children, who said she had to keep her child from answering the telephone because of the comments from strangers, added that the children had remained in the classroom during the school prayer because "we didn't want to make Pariahs of them."
Steven I. Engel and Daniel Lichtenstein, of Roslyn Heights, each of whom has two children in schools in the district, said they were "extremely happy" over the decision, says the New York Times. Lawrence Roth credited William J. Butler, of New York, who represented the complaining parents, and the New York Civil Liberties Union for the "successful conclusion" of the case.
Mr. Butler said that religion and the Bill of Rights would benefit from the Supreme Court decision.
"In this country, with its many different faiths, religion has flourished because we have steadfastly adhered to the principle of separation of church and state, Mr. Butler said.
"The Supreme Court has today reaffirmed that principle."
Mr. Butler said that the local school board would be enjoined from continuing an "unconstitutional act" and that similar orders would be obtained where necessary in other school districts throughout the state.
William J. Vitale Jr., who voted in favor of using the prayer when he was president of the local school board, commented:
"The high court has now ruled and this is the purpose of our system of jurisprudence�to determine these questions. I feel surety that any of the people involved are prepared to adhere to the decision of the court."
Mr. Vitale said that when the prayer was recommended by the Board of Regents "we felt, of course, it would be helpful to every body.w
"At no time did we ever insist that a child should say it. We set up mechanics so no one would be compelled to say it and we felt sincerely we were not infringing on anyone's constitutional rights,'' he said, reports the New York Times. Porter R. Chandler, of New York, represented sixteen New Hyde Parle parents�Jewish, Protestant. Catholic and "unaffiliated* who wanted to retain the prayer.
Earlier a report pf a special committee on "Jews In the Soviet orbit," headed by Ribbi Richard C. Hertz, of Detroit, Mich., was distributed to the Conference delegates, says the New* York Times. The committee report bore out the contentions of the resolution. "The past year," the report asserted, "has seen the steady:deterioration of the position of Jews and Judaism in the Soviet Union and the whittling away of t^eir religious freedoms." It contin
"The settling of a cloud of fear upon the nearly 3,000,000 Jews of the U. S. S. R. has brought the gravest apprehensions.. To be sure, the stark terrorism (of the black Stalin days is gone,'but the fear that these days may return, the fear of reprisals on, the job for attending religious services, the fear of the secret finger pointing at Jews because of contacts with foreigners, has brought neither confidence nor security to Soviet Jewry.
"Nearly 3,000,000 Jews in the U. S. S. R. are being? slowly strangled spiritually by the Soviet policy of forcible assimilation. Cultural and religious discrimination against the Jewish minority is widely practiced. Jewish synagogues are gradually being closed, their leaders arrested, and disappearing in a mysterious manner reminiscent of Stalinism.
"No Jewish education can be given to the young. No Jewish schools or Jewish organizations are allowed. No Jewish religious books are published."
While Soviet Moslems are allowed to visit Mfceca and representatives ol th^fO^Wfllt Russian Church eoulrceiM&aJjaroe delegation to the assembly of the World Council of Churches in New Delhi, India, the report declared, no similar visits abroad are permitted to Jewish religious leaders.
"Invitations sent to the Chief Rabbi in Moscow and to the few other spiritual leaders of the Jewish community to attend rabbinic conferences in the Free World go unanswered," it said, reports the New York Times. "There is no Jewish religious life even remotely comparable to what other religious denominations enjoy within the U.S.S.R."
Israel Advances Loan To Begin Film Industry There
Israel will be the next country to compete with Hollywood in movie production. An Israeli studio tp be built this summer will make feature-length films and try to induce Americans to work there.
These plans were detailed by Ed H. Leftwich, who said the Israeli Government had advanced him a loan of about $350,000 to start the project, reports the New York Times. Mr. Leftwich is head of two companies, Futuramic Productions, in California, and Futuramic Productions, Ltd., of Israel. Associated with Mr. Leftwich will be David Barsel, an Israeli movie distributor.
Israel has set aside 2,500 acres about five miles from Tel Aviv for the construction of the new studio, according to Barsel and Leftwich. The studio will start out with three sound stages � a small studio by standards in Hollywood, where a studio with fifteen sound stages is not considered large.
Construction of the studio is scheduled to begin in August. It is hoped that shooting will start there early next year, but construction is not expected to be completed until next summer.
Though the loan was made by the Israeli Government, the studio is to be privately operated, Mr. Leftwich said. About eighteen months ago, Israel, after investigating movie possibilities, invited him to visit the country. He was convinced that a movie studio could operate profitably there.
"Israel is interested in the world market for movies," he said. "It will not limit itself to Bibie pictures. It does not believe that Israel is suitable for movie work only on location. We intend to use the studio to make all sorts of movies."
Th* best-known film to be made thus far in Israel is "Exodus," which was produced and directed by Otto Preminger, with Paul Newman, Eva Marie Saint, Lee J. Cobb, Peter Lawford, and Sal Mi-neo in the starring roles.
Early next year Mr. Leftwich plans to make a movie in the new studio called "The Last Vendetta." Generally, the studio will inake English-language films. However, if co-productions arrangements are made with companies from other nations, movies in other languages will be produced.
(Continued on Page Seven)
NOW...
Your
SAYINGS EARN MORE
at
Canada9s First Bank...
Effective July 1st, savings deposits at the B of M will earn interest at the rate of
0
PER ANNUM
HX DANK'
QjjfiJ
Take advantage of this new, higher rate by opening a B of M savings account today . . . Follow the example of three million Canadians who are building for tomorrow at Canada's First Bank.
Bank of Montreal
There are 79 B of M BRANCHES in the MONTREAL DISTRICT to serve you
WOWING WITH CANADIANS IN EVUfY WALK Of LIFE SINCE 1817
Mitt