“This court has long recognized that religious schools have two purposes, religious education and secular education. In the landmark case of Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U. p. 510 (1925), the court held that. Oregon had not demonstrated that its interest in secular education required all children to attend public schools. At the head of the Indian independence movement, Gandhi wrote in 1927 that he dreamed of an India “completely tolerant, in which its religions work side by side.” India`s 1949 constitution, adopted after Gandhi`s assassination by a Hindu nationalist, enshrined elements of secularism in law. These elements were expressed even more clearly in the constitutional amendment adopted in 1976. The line we must draw between the permissible and the impermissible is one that is consistent with history and faithfully reflects the understanding of the Founding Fathers. This is a line which the Court has constantly endeavoured to mark in its decisions in which it has set out the religious guarantees of the former.
Of course, “followers of certain individual religions and churches often take strong positions on public issues.” Walz v. Tax Commission, op. cit. cit., 397 and p. 670. We could not expect anything else, because religious values permeate the fabric of our national life. But in Walz, we looked at status under state tax laws for the benefit of all religious groups. These are successive and most likely ongoing annual funds that benefit relatively few religious groups.
Political fragmentation and divisions at the religious level are therefore likely to intensify. “In the public school, the selection of a faculty and the administration of the school are usually the responsibility of a school board, which is subject to election and removal by the electors, but in the parochial school, the selection of a faculty and the administration of the school are in the hands of the bishop alone. and is usually administered by the local priest. If a faculty member in a public school feels that he or she has been treated unfairly through disciplinary action or dismissal, he or she may seek redress in a civil court and is guaranteed a hearing. But if a faculty member is sanctioned or fired in a parochial school, he has no recourse. The word of the bishop or priest is final, even without explanation, if he so wishes. Taxpayers have a say in how their money is used in public schools, but people who support a parochial school have no say in such matters. “There is another area of involvement in the Rhode Island program that is a cause for concern. The law excludes teachers employed in non-public schools whose average expenditure per student on secular education is equal to or higher than comparable figures for public schools. In the event that an otherwise eligible school`s total expenditures exceed this standard, the program requires the government to review the school`s records to determine how much of the total spending is attributable to secular education and how much to religious activities. This type of state inspection and evaluation of the religious content of a religious organization is riddled with the kind of entanglement prohibited by the constitution. It is a relationship that is pregnant with the dangers of excessive state management of religious schools and therefore churches.
The Court noted “the dangers of government support for churches” in Walz v. Tax Commission, op. cit. cit., 397 U. p. 675, and we cannot ignore here the danger that the omnipresent modern governmental power will eventually invade religion and thus come into conflict with religious clauses. Thus, for more than a century, the consensus, enforced with considerable consistency by legislators and courts, has been that public subsidization of sectarian schools constitutes inappropriate participation of secular schools. In the absence of concrete constitutional prohibitions, we must draw boundaries with respect to the three main evils against which the Establishment Clause should provide protection: “sponsorship, financial support, and active participation of the sovereign in religious activities.” Walz v Tax Commission, 397 U. S. 664, 397 U. S. 668 (1970).
“In parochial schools, Roman Catholic indoctrination is included in all subjects. History, literature, geography, civics and science were given Roman Catholic direction. The whole education of the child is filled with propaganda. That, of course, is the real purpose of these schools, the real reason for all the work and cost of maintaining a dual school system. Its purpose is not so much to educate, but to indoctrinate and train, not to teach scriptural truths and Americanism, but to make loyal Catholics. Children are regimented and told what to wear, what to do and what to think. The Act authorizes the respondent State Superintendent of Education to “purchase” certain “secular education services” from non-public schools. According to the “contracts” approved by law, the state directly reimburses non-public schools only for their actual expenses on teachers` salaries, textbooks, and teaching materials.
A broader base of interdependence of yet another character is represented by the divisive political potential of these government programs. In a community where so many students are served by religious schools, it can be assumed that state support is associated with considerable political activity. Supporters of parochial schools, who are understandably concerned about rising costs and genuinely devoted to the religious and secular educational missions of their schools, will inevitably champion this cause and promote political action to achieve their goals. Those who oppose state aid on constitutional, religious or fiscal grounds will inevitably react and use all the usual political campaign techniques to win. Candidates are forced to explain themselves and voters are forced to vote. It would be unrealistic to ignore the fact that many people facing problems of this kind find their voices in harmony with their faith. Even in the years immediately following the ratification of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, there have been no significant changes. Schools continued to be local and predominantly denominational institutions. [Note 3/3] But the demand for public education quickly emerged. The development of wrestling in New York is an illustration of this.
[Note 3/4] In 1786, the first legislature of New York State ordered that a section in each ward be reserved for “the gospel and schools.” Since there are no public schools, various private agencies and churches have run “charity schools” for the poor of New York. These are just the highlights of the manual. But they show how pervasive religious control over the school is and how far this type of school is from the secular school. The public funds that support this structure are used to perpetuate doctrine and belief in countless pervasive ways. Those who occupy these schools are good people, enthusiastic people, dedicated people. But they are dedicated to ideas that the framers of our Constitution placed beyond the reach of government. The court held a hearing in which extensive evidence was presented about the type of secular education offered in Catholic schools, whose teachers would be entitled to wage assistance under the law. Although the Court concluded that concern for religious values does not necessarily influence the content of secular subjects, it also concluded that the parish school system is “an integral part of the religious mission of the Catholic Church.” For many evangelical leaders who had followed the issue since Green v. Connally, Bob Jones University was the straw that broke the camel`s back.
As Elmer L. Rumminger, a longtime trustee at Bob Jones University, told me in an interview that the IRS`s actions against his school have alerted “the Christian school community to what might happen to government interference” in the affairs of evangelical institutions.