A high school athletic director has been thrust into the national spotlight because he prayed in public. He took his case to court, and now, seven years later, the High Court has agreed to hear Kennedy v. Bremerton School District.  

This is reminiscent of the recent kerfuffle over the two Christians in Finland who went on trial for publicly confessing their faith. Readers will recall the victory in a Finnish courtroom we celebrated over the unanimous verdict in favor of Mrs. Païvi Räsänan and Bishop Juhana Pohjola, both of whom are recipients of Gottesdienst’s Sabre of Boldness, because the court determined it was not right for the government to get tangled up in the matter of Bible interpretation and the public stifling of free speech. Hopefully that victory will not be short-lived, though it has been appealed, predictably. Opponents, still fuming over the challenge that evident reality poses for their unfortunate and arguably deranged views on sexuality and marriage, have no intention of backing down.

And now on this side of the pond, before the Supreme Court comes the matter of publicly praying. Oral arguments were heard last Monday.

Joe Kennedy, the complainant, explained in an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal that appeared on the day of the hearing (April 25, 2022) that he had promised God that he would “take a knee by myself in quiet prayer at the 50-yard line following every game, win or lose.” This developed over years into a motivational talk when players became interested in what he was doing, but when the administration told him to stop,  he gladly agreed to do so, and reverted to his previous practice of praying alone on the 50. But when the lawyers stepped in, the requirement changed to refraining from anything public or visible, with the suggestion that he go to a room far removed from the public eye. Mr. Kennedy determined that if he were to comply, it would send a message that prayer is bad and should be hidden, so he refused. He was suspended for that, though they admitted there was “no evidence that students have been directly coerced” to pray along. No matter. He was fired with a negative evaluation and the warning “Do Not Rehire” emblazoned on it. Mr. Kennedy, a former Marine, thus has made his plea to the Court.

The liberals on the Court have lined up against him of course. Justice Kagan opined that what he is doing still constitutes a form of coercion, because it “kind of puts undue press on student (sic) to participate when they may not wish to,” and Justice Sotomayor agrees, saying, “He chose to publicize his prayer, and he got down on one knee on the 50-yard line.” I frankly find this laughable. As Mr. Kennedy has said, “teachers could be fired for praying over their lunch” by that standard. And thankfully most of the other Justices seem to be on his side. Justice Alito has even indicated that religious expression should be treated no differently than the expression of political views, a protected right. The Court’s majority appears to be in agreement that Mr. Kennedy’s conduct should not be considered an endorsement of religion, and it’s widely believed that they’ll rule in his favor, come June (NBC News online April 25, 2022).

So here’s another example of religion, specifically Christianity, under attack in the public worldwide spotlight. First Finland, now here. For now it appears that public sentiment is coming down pretty heavily on the side of free speech, and that’s a good thing of course. But there’s no telling the future. I know I inherited my sainted mother’s perpetual optimism about things, but still I find in this an urgent need for continued prayer, not only on the 50-yard line. Martin Luther quipped that the world has no idea how much it owes the Christians for their prayers, and I, too, believe those prayers have certainly made a difference, and that Someone is listening. So let’s keep praying. And as for the future, it was once said that we don’t know what the future holds, but we know Who holds the future. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.