# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1950_S1065
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

PARISH EDUCATION - 867

Ebeing misused, we must take heed lest we become advocates of a
Etype or degree of separation that will work harm both to the
_Shurch and to the nation.

. Separation of Church and State, in so far as it is implied in the
E First Amendment, does not mean’ the exclusion of religion from
wthe State or from the education of children. This is borne out by
e history. The Constitution was framed in 1787. On the day of its
E adoption the President was asked to recommend to the people a
L.day of thanksgiving and prayer in grateful acknowledgment of
jthis document. In 1790 the House adopted a resolution that chap-
Blains be appointed by Congress, a practice which continues to the
present day. Later congresses provided for the appointment of
; chaplains for the Army and Navy. Every President except Jeffer-
E.son has proclaimed days of prayer and thanksgiving. Grants of
land were made to denominational colleges. Most States grant
religious bodies exemption from taxation. In most States the
Churches have been granted the use of public buildings for edu-
. cational and other purposes. Religious instruction was the rule
.in the early public schools of the nation.

4 The State can be on friendly terms with the Church without
: "interfering with its functions or breaking down the distinction be-
q tween the two institutions, in fact, the State should co-operate with
e. the Church wherever the welfare of the nation demands such co-
E operation. Therefore we must regard with apprehension the fol-
; lowing statement of one of the Supreme Court Justices in the
Everson case: “Neither a State, nor the Federal Government, can
t pass laws which aid any religion, aid all religions, or prefer one
religion to another.” We take no exception to the words: “prefer
z= one religion to another,” for the First Amendment certainly does
prohibit the Federal Government from any preferential treatment
: of any Church. But the first clause is ominous in its import.
.. Hitherto this court had never ruled that the Government may not
;-aid all churches on an equal or non-preferential basis. Hitherto
“the matter of taxing for the support of religion had been left
§ wholly to the discretion of the States, it being considered beyond
r the jurisdiction of the Federal Government, and the States have
4 consequently passed legislation to prohibit the use of tax moneys
. for the support of any Church. But to deny the right of the Federal
;. Government and the States to “aid all religions” on a non-prefer-
4 enial basis in any manner whatsoever is to go counter to American
. history and practice. On the basis of the assertion in the Everson
q . case, the Supreme Court in 1949, in the Champaign case, ruled
. that the practice. of holding released-time classes in public school
. buildings was “aiding” religion and was therefore contrary to the
;. Constitution.