Evening star., 1949-07-31
Letters to The Star

and as such the Cardinal Is not only emf
nently equipped to NEEDLE" but also must
speak out uncompromisingly against its i'm
morality.
Reader Roths position rests on the falla-
cious assumption that there is such thing
as complete separation of church and state"
There is no such thing, for if there were,
then the Congress and the Military Estab-
lishment could have no chaplains, veterans
could not 60 to UNCONVENTIONAL colleges on
Federal funds and so on ad nauseam.
Reader Rust sounds like he is a member OF
the real estate lobby; but apart from that,
1.-The amount of property owned tax free in
this country by the Catholic Church" Is
beside the point in this dispute, although the
fact that it does is just another indication
that there is no such thing as complete sepa-
ration Of church and state in this country.
Reader Greeley confuses sincerity with
truth. Granted that Mrs. Roosevelt is
sincere" humanitarian; she is not ipso facto
a true humanitarian. In the same way
many Protestants are sincere in their re-
ligiouD Dconvictions. Numerically opposed as
they may be; this does not and cannot mean
that each Of these convictions is true, for
contradictory beliefs cannot be true together
Reader Good has evidently missed the
point of the McCollum decision. Since that
decision the public schools are legally both
antireligious and a-religious. and as such
are not fitting places for Catholic parents to
send their children.
Reader Haynes. the one who advocated last
week absolute freedom" Of the individual
from the church, i.e., spiritual anarchy, is
partially answered by the reply to Reader
Good above and adequately answered by the
question, "Why should we maintain secular
istic schools to provide secularists an edu-
cation?"
Reader Longacre cites Jefferson in support
of this position against the Cardinal: ITO
compel a man to furnish contributions OF
money for the propagation of opinions which
he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical." Is
Mr.. Longacre so short sighted as not to see
that can use those very words in support
of my position against the Barden bill?
Catholics pay taxes to support the public
schools. The public school is now by law
completely secularistic and as such "propa-
gates" secularism, doctrine which Cath
olics "disbelieve!"
Reader Small is beyond doubt the most
DANGEROUS His position Is implicitly totali-
tartan. He asserts that the primary duty to
educate children resides In the state. This Is
not only against the natural moral law but 1t
ID contrary to all American tradition. The
primary duty Of educating children resides IN
those who are responsible for bringing them
into existence, viz, the parents. According
to the principle Of subsidiarity, the state may
only intervene where individual or private
groups are unable to fulfll their duty, and
then first to assist those individual and
private groups. It cannot be demonstrated
that private and parochial schools cannot
provide adequate education for children with
Federal aid.
Reader Mattingly misconstrues the Cardi-
nails letter. It was not an "infallible" pro-
nouncement: 1t was only his considered opin-
ion, to which lend my unqualified support.
NORMAN JAMES SIMLER.