In today’s
education system, there are many different options for schools that children
can attend, including both private and public schools. Among private schools
are what to be considered “religious” schools, where students can pay to
receive private educations with a focus on the morals and teachings of certain
religion.
There is
currently still a debate as to whether religious schools should be given public
funding. Many believe that by providing “Parochiaid”, which is aid for
parochial and other non-public elementary and secondary schools, is a violation
of the establishment of religion clause. This clause of the first amendment
states that, “Congress should make no law respecting an establishment of
religion”. This clause has also been interpreted to mean that the government
must not favor one religion over another, or favor non-religion over religion
and vice versa. In the case of Everson v.
Board of Education in 1947, the Supreme Court ruled that the establishment
of religion clause prohibited any form of parochiaid.
Canada
differs from the United States, as does not have the principle directly
establishing a separation between Church and State. The British North American
Act gave “legal protection to the rights of denominational schools” (Thiessen
2). This gave Protestant and Roman Catholic schools in some Canadian regions the
right to receive public funding for their schools. This does not follow the US
establishment clause, where supporting certain religious schools would be
considered the government favoring certain religions over others.
This
government involvement in the “establishment” of a certain religion does not
follow from what the Church teaches us. In Gadium et Spes, the Vatican states
that, “The Church and the political community in their own fields are
autonomous and independent from each other” (GS 76). Therefore, public funding
to certain religious schools would be violating the establishment clause and
interfere with the teachings of the Church. Some could even say that this
“public funding” could lead to certain mandates of the religious schools, thus
interfering with the teachings of the Church. While both entities hope to educate the nation's youth in the best manner possible, it would be best if they didn't interfere with the other.
Sources:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/establishment_clause
THIESSEN, ELMER JOHN. “Funding of Religious Schools and the Separation of Church and State.” In Defence of Religious Schools and Colleges, McGill-Queen's University Press, 2001, pp. 99–114, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt806p4.10.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/establishment_clause
THIESSEN, ELMER JOHN. “Funding of Religious Schools and the Separation of Church and State.” In Defence of Religious Schools and Colleges, McGill-Queen's University Press, 2001, pp. 99–114, www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt806p4.10.
As someone who went to private school, I am familiar with this debate. I am from New Orleans, and my high school was flooded in Hurricane Katrina (this was before I attended). The federal government offered grants for school damaged in the disaster - as long as the money did not go towards religious studies. For example, the grants paid for computer labs for the math and English departments, but the computer labs had signs which reminded students that the labs were not to be used for religious classes or classwork. This was slightly inconvenient, but overall I believe it follows the establishment of religion clause. In this situation, the school needed aid, and without that aid because it was a religious school seems worse than providing it.
ReplyDeleteI really like your post because it points out that bishops at the second Vatican council had to say about the separation between church and state, and the fact that they were in favor of it, to! I think it's important to remember that just because someone is religious and wants to live their private life in a manner than aligns with Christian values does not mean that they think the government should follow those same values. Even religious organizations promote the separation between church and state, which I think it definitely important to remember when debating the issue.
ReplyDeleteI think that your conclusions about this topic are accurate since public funding in religious schools could lead to further involvement of the government in these religious institutions. On the other hand, you stated that the government should not favor non-religion over religion. If the government is only providing funding for non-religious schools, isn't that favoring non-religion over religion? While I agree that they should be kept separate, it is an interesting point to consider.
ReplyDelete