Archbishop Wenski: US Supreme
Court ruling 'a great thing for religious liberty'
 |
| A parent accompanies her child to school (2018 Getty Images) |
The Chairman of the U.S. Bishops’ Conference Committee for
Religious Liberty reacts to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling which permits funding
for religiously-affiliated schools.
By Fr. Benedict Mayaki, SJ
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday against a Montana
state constitutional provision that barred aid to religiously-affiliated
schools solely because of their religious character.
This ruling means that states cannot cut religious schools
out of programs that send public money to private education. It also opens the
door to parents in Montana seeking to use a tax credit scholarship program to
send their children to private schools.
The 5 – 4 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Espinoza
v. Montana Department of Revenue has been lauded by U.S. Bishops as
“good news” which promotes the “common good.”
In an interview with Vatican News, the Chairman of the U.S.
Bishops’ Conference Committee for Religious Liberty, Archbishop Thomas G.
Wenski of Miami, speaks on the recent decision.
The Supreme court ruling
Welcoming the ruling, Archbishop Wenski said it is “a great
thing for religious liberty” as it “strengthens the position” of those in
support of funding to religious schools.
He explained that the ruling basically set aside the “Blaine
language” present in the constitution of the state of Montana and about
thirty-seven other states.
Providing some background to the “Blaine Amendment”,
Archbishop Wenski said that Blaine was a 19th century U.S.
senator and presidential candidate who almost succeeded in passing a “no aid”
amendment to the U.S. constitution as regards funding for sectarian schools.
He further noted that the Blaine Amendment discriminated
against Catholic schools because most of the public schools at that time were
protestant in their administration. He described them as a “vestige of bigotry from
another age” which portrayed “anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant nativist
sentiments” that prevailed in the U.S. in the nineteenth century.
According to Archbishop Wenski, Tuesday’s ruling
“underscores the right of people of faith to serve their communities and also
to serve it in the way of education. It also upholds the rights of parents to
be the first ones who determine who should or how their children should be
educated.”
Church and state
Responding to a question about the implication of the ruling
regarding the separation between church and state, Archbishop Wenski cautioned
against its interpretation in “extreme ways.”
He said that “the separation of church and state was meant
to prevent the state from taking over religion, but it was not meant to keep
religious beliefs or religious influences from society.”
Giving the examples of countries like France, Canada and
Australia, he explained that these countries, which are more secular than the
United States, have no problems with supporting parents who send their children
to confessional or religious schools.
School choice debate
Speaking on the question of students’ choice to attend other
public schools outside their neighborhoods, Archbishop Wenski indicated his
support for having private schools as alternatives.
He explained that public-school teacher unions, that
oppose support for private schools and want to “maintain their monopoly over
education”, represent a contributing factor to the debate.. But, said the
Archbishop, “when there is monopoly, we see the education system fails the
students.”
“Having these private schools supported by vouchers, in
which parents can choose the school that is best for their child, introduces a
level of competition,” he said, adding that he thinks it “improves the public
schools as well.”
Non-Catholic institutions
Regarding the issue of what is perceived to be a lesser
religious influence of non-Catholic institutions in education, Archbishop
Wenski remarked that a lot of other religious groups have also started their
own schools.
He attributed this trend to “secularism in public schools”
which communities of faith are combatting by “exercising their right to educate
their children in a way that allows a faith perspective to be part of the
curriculum.”
Giving the particular example of the Baptist Churches in
Florida, Archbishop Wenski said that they have many schools and benefit to a
greater degree from the state-supported tax credit scholarship system than
Catholic schools.
In fact, continued the Archbishop, “the Supreme Court case
was introduced not by a catholic parent but by a protestant.”
Concluding, Archbishop Wenski said that the ruling allows
parents to choose an option in which kids can be taught “the truth, the whole
truth and nothing but the truth” and not just a partial truth that a secular
vision would offer.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét