# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1947_S283
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

EN MER ne Oe cae et

PARISH EDUCATION \ 288

education). It was held that a vital difference exists between these
two programs. As to the social service program, the position was
taken that this should in equity be available to all children of
school age irrespective of their school association, just as public
library service. As to the teaching program, the position was
taken that it was most unwise for the Church to accept a subsidy
even though the right to control has been waived by the State.
In fact, far from agitating for State support, it was held that we
should oppose the granting of State funds for sectarian use.

Few have disagreed as to the position we have taken on the
matter of State subsidy for sectarian education. It seems clear
that government aid to any institution, public or non-public,
brings with it an increase in government control, even where
the law seeks to prevent such extension of control. Any aid for
instructional services, such as part payment of teachers’ salaries
or of assistance in the construction of school buildings, would im-
mediately bring with it corresponding degrees of control, This
we do not want. Nor do we feel that there should be govern-
ment aid for other non-public schools. On the principle of separa-
tion of Church and State, we should oppose bills that would pro-
vide for government aid to non-public schools.

With respect to government aid in such matters as transporta~
tion, library service, health service, and school-lunch programs,
it is the opinion of your Board that the position adopted by Synod
in 1944 should be reaffirmed. Obviously, such services can be
utilized only if the’respective State or the Federal government
makes such services legally available. Obviously, too, such aid
in the social service field should be accepted only if there are
sufficient safeguards so that no control by the State or Federal
government is permitted in matters of instruction or curriculum.

Religious Education in State-Supported Schools
(An Opinion)

The Board for Parish Education submitted to Synod a state-
ment on “State Support of Church Schools” in 1944 (Proceedings,
pp. 131—134). At that time your Board informed Synod that the
problem of religion in State-supported schools was being investi-
gated. Meanwhile, a subcommittee, consisting of Dr, Einar W.
Anderson, Professor O. C. Rupprecht, and Dr. Paul W. Lange, has
done some painstaking research on the problem, and the Board
and staff have been active in the study. The problem, however,
has so many aspects that it cannot be adequately covered in a
report which, of necessity, must be brief. We are therefore sub-
mitting in short paragraphs only those aspects of the problem which
we consider of prime importance. We hope, however, that these