Freund Defends Prayer Decision

The popular debate about prayer in the public schools continues to be marked by "glaring misunderstandings" and "unreasoning emotions," Paul A. Freund, Carl M. Loeb University Professor, told the House Judiciary Committee Friday.

Freund characterized the recent court verdicts on school prayers as "sound and necessary reflections of the constitutional guarantees of the First Amendment." He said that the emotional atmosphere now surrounding the issue "is not a proper setting in which to reach a decision that would dislocate a basic provision of the Bill of Rights."

No Sectarian Services

Freund argued that the right of the majority to free exercise of religion does not extend to the holding of sectarian services in the school-room. He pointed out the impossibility of composing a suitable nonsectarian exercise, remarking that "one man's piety is another man's idolatry."

A school prayer at best could only be "so bland as to be meaningless" or "so sectarian as to be divisive," Freund stated. He emphasized that the most important effect of the Supreme Court's decision should be "a serious and basic inquiry into the moral component of public education."

Freund called for new attention to the curricular moral instruction that should replace sectarian religious exercises.