Evening star., 1949-08-13
Sets Forth Critical View
OF Catholic Education


Of Catholic Education
To the Editor of The Star:
Mrs. Flora M. Coan, in her letter Of
August presenting the Catholic view of
Government aid to education, says she is
"baf1ed by the separation OF church and
state argument" If she analyzes what she
has written, however, she can f1nd reasons
why nom Catholics oppose her position.
Her first premise Is wrong when she says
Catholics have not sought construction OF
schools, teachers salaries nor school mainte-
nance-so how can 1t be claimed that we are
trying to unite church and state?" Perhaps
there is a techhicality as to who officially
sought the support. but parochial schools
in 20 districts of New Mexico have been
supported entirely by tax funds.
Mrs. Coan implies. as Cardinal spellman
recently stated, that the church does not
seek Federal or State aid beyond health
and welfare" facilities for children attending
church schools. This. also. Is not true. The
church never have disavowed that 1t Is en-
titled in principle to Government support for
its schools, at least to the extent Of the
amount of secular education they are re-
quired to provide.
The church's Interpretation of the first
amendment Of the Constitution prohibiting
IAN establishment of religion" is that aid of
any kind may be provided to church schools
so long as no denomination is Disseminated
against. This accounts for the church's
tolerance, If not encouragement, OF public
tax support for its schools in New Mexico.
The predominant Protestant attitude is
one OF strict Interpretation of the First
Amendment, calling for non on-discriminatory
denial Of public funds to all church schools.
Mrs. Coan argues that the Constitution
guarantees freedom of religion and she adds:
If. through economic pressure, we cannot
exercise this freedom of choice. then our
religious liberty is endangered. BY economic
pressure we mean that the ever growing
burden of double taxation will make 1t i'm
possible for many Catholic parents to keep
their children in parochial schools
"Double Taxation" Denied.
Here Mre. Coan states the basic premise
of her opponents argument She implies
that double taxation" for parochial parents
is unfair If this is so, the remedy is to pro-
vide full public support for parochial
schools. for only in this way can the ECO
nonic pressure" restricting religious free
dom" be removed incidentally. double tax
alton is loaded catch-phrase and misnomer.
Voluntary contributions or expenditures for
parochial or private schooling are not taxes
in any sense. ss@
It is clear from Mrs. Coaia.s aFgtfnent that
the issue is not auxiliary services' as
against direct support OF church education
by tax funds. The goal at the moment is
limited. but the principle involved Is sweep
ing, The question is not whether American
children" are to be Disseminated against"
on the basis of race. color or religion"-to
cite the dramatized treatment Of the matter
by Cardinal Spellman--but whether the
country is to accept an obligation to support
1aAA
Mrs. Coan acknowledges that every parent
has the opportunity to send his child to
public school. It should also be noted that
the Government has not asked the church
to establish . school system and therefore
should not be expected to support one. The
fact that the theoretical release Of all paro-
chial pupils would swamp present public
school facilities does not mean that the
State has relinquished its right and obliga-
ton to provide free education to all. More
noney would have to be raised and more
public schools built II there were an increased
demand for free education.
Those Catholics who want religious educa-
ton for their children should seek 1t at their
own expense They are no more entitled to
rebate of their share of taxes for public
education than person who never reads a
a book is entitled to his share Of the taxes
which support public libraries.
Parents Held Presumptuous.
It might be pointed out that religious
classes could be held after public school
hours and then the Catholic parent would
be paying extra only for actual religious
schooling. But If the church and parent
want religion integrated with the secular
curriculum, and remove the child from
public schools for this purpose, 1t is pre-
sumptuous on their part to expect public
support.
Although opponents Of public aid for relig-
ious schools include many persons VINO
favor strictly health benefits to be dispensed
through all schools. they are united in OPP
posing any bill which combines ipdisputable
health benefits with assistance which Is In
separately involved with education and which
gives financial aid to sectarian schools.
Tax-supported transportation to parochial
schools, for instance, is Cd an indirect but
real financial grant to church schools and
ca one means Of promoting parochial edu-
cation in competition with public schooling
with public funds. Free textbooks also
amount to financial assistance to parochial
schools. It can be argued that the children
get a personal benefit from these services.
but no more so than from any other factor
in their education. Consequently the sarss
principle involved in grants for transporta-
ton and textbooks can be applied to justify
almost complete support Of church schools
by the Government.
From the standpoint Of those who oppose
her arguments, Mrs. Coan Is also consioer-
ably confused on legislative obligations IN
volved in the issue. She says. Catholics,
rather than trying to secure new Dement'S
for their children. are merely trying to keep
what already has been constttutionally
ora ntAd them as q result Of the Supreme
Court decision in the Oregon and New Jersey
cases" Actually, the court merely said that
certain laws with benefits for parochial
schools are constitutional Therefore. any
other laws passed which agree with those
upheld will be constitutional. unless the
court should reverse. its stand in the future
But it does not obligate morally or legally
any legislature to pass other laws Of this
kind.