UPON RECEIVING LEGAL ADVICE, and not just that offered by this blog, the Cave Spring City Council has apparently decided it is not such a good idea after all to open each meeting with a public recitation of “The Lord’s Prayer” because, as should have been obvious all along, it is specific to a single faith. Put another way, being personally cognizant of a higher power is one thing; seeking community favor for a specific model is quite another under this nation’s Constitution.

Assuming the new decision holds (there was no quorum at the meeting at which the decision was made, a not entirely uncommon no-show condition for Cave Spring conclaves) the alternative will be to have pastors of Cave Spring’s six churches, in rotation, offer an opening prayer. Such might slide by, and already does elsewhere, although not without continuing legal challenges.

There’s no reason to make a “federal case” out of Cave Spring. However, in sorting such things out it might be helpful to understand that personal/faith beliefs are not under challenge. The insult to liberty is when, under the implied threat of government order, any citizen is forced to acknowledge something which he or she does not believe — as in an imposed speaking of a specific prayer.

To this day, many Americans when reciting the Pledge of Allegiance do not use their vocal cords when the “under God” phrase added by Congress in 1954 as a deliberate political jab at “godless communism” is reached, although the pledge was originally written in 1892 by a Christian socialist clergyman who avoided mentioning God at all.

As it is remarkable what is not taught in schools nowadays, the U.S. Supreme Court has on several occasions ruled that nobody can be made to either recite the Pledge nor be punished for refusing to do so.