(RNS) A pending case at the U.S. Supreme Court could dramatically affect the religious freedom of all Americans.
The case, Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer, is scheduled to be argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday (April 19). It concerns a church in Missouri that sued state officials because the state refused to pay to resurface the church’s playground.
Missouri’s constitution, like the majority of state constitutions, contains language restricting taxpayer support of religious institutions — a protection that keeps a healthy distance between church and state. Lower courts have ruled that Missouri officials could decline to provide government funds to the church, but Trinity Lutheran has appealed to the Supreme Court.
[ad number=“1”]
Just last week, Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens took the extraordinary step of announcing houses of worship now will be eligible for the very type of funding that was denied to Trinity Lutheran in 2012. It’s unclear how the Supreme Court will react to this 11th-hour maneuver, but Greitens’ action should render the case moot. The governor has handed the church the very remedy it is seeking at the Supreme Court: eligibility for taxpayer money.
Yet Greitens’ action is troubling. He is imperiling the religious freedom of both his state’s churches and his citizens. For more than 200 years, houses of worship in America have successfully relied on contributions given voluntarily by members and supporters. This arrangement has done wonders for religion in America. Voluntary funding has created a robust, diverse faith community.
By contrast, taxpayer funding of churches is extremely problematic for a number of reasons. For starters, it violates the fundamental right of conscience to compel people to support a religion with which they don’t agree. Anger over compulsory support for ministers and churches led to the creation of the principle of separation of church and state by statesmen like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. We shouldn’t return to a system that our founders found antithetical to liberty.
Taxpayer funding of religion also is a recipe for discrimination. Government is bound to play favorites in deciding which churches get funding. At the same time, congregations could end up compromising their spiritual beliefs for fear that criticism of government officials would negatively impact their funding stream. And faith leaders may even find themselves enmeshed in politics, as congregations are tempted to support those politicians who promise to direct money the churches’ way.
And with government money comes government oversight. Once houses of worship begin accepting taxpayer dollars, they must be accountable to the taxpayers for how that money is spent. Churches currently are free from such financial oversight and government entanglement — why change that?
[ad number=“2”]
The principle of church-state separation has protected religious freedom since the founding of our country. We’re allowed to choose our religious beliefs as our consciences dictate and worship accordingly without government interference. We all are able to choose which churches and charities we support through our deeds and donations, and we don’t have to worry about our tax dollars supporting religious missions we may not believe in. The Trinity Lutheran case seeks to upend a system of proven worth and replace it with a modern form of church taxes.
Trinity Lutheran Church may be in Missouri, but the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision — assuming that the court doesn’t dismiss the case as moot — could be felt across the country because three-quarters of the states have constitutional provisions like Missouri’s. A broad ruling by the Supreme Court could require states to ignore their own constitutions and direct taxpayer money to churches, synagogues, mosques and other houses of worship — opening a Pandora’s box that puts our religious freedom at risk.
[ad number=“3”]
I’m not alone in my fears – like Americans United for Separation of Church and State, nearly 20 civil liberties and faith-based organizations submitted or joined legal briefs asking the Supreme Court to uphold Missouri’s right to refuse to fund religious groups.
These groups are speaking out because they know that voluntary support for religion has served our nation well. Both freedom of conscience and church autonomy stand to lose if the Supreme Court tosses that principle aside.
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
In America, religious groups should pay their own way
(RNS) A pending case at the U.S. Supreme Court could dramatically affect the religious freedom of all Americans.
(RNS) A pending case at the U.S. Supreme Court could dramatically affect the religious freedom of all Americans.
The case, Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer, is scheduled to be argued before the Supreme Court on Wednesday (April 19). It concerns a church in Missouri that sued state officials because the state refused to pay to resurface the church’s playground.
Missouri’s constitution, like the majority of state constitutions, contains language restricting taxpayer support of religious institutions — a protection that keeps a healthy distance between church and state. Lower courts have ruled that Missouri officials could decline to provide government funds to the church, but Trinity Lutheran has appealed to the Supreme Court.
[ad number=“1”]
Just last week, Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens took the extraordinary step of announcing houses of worship now will be eligible for the very type of funding that was denied to Trinity Lutheran in 2012. It’s unclear how the Supreme Court will react to this 11th-hour maneuver, but Greitens’ action should render the case moot. The governor has handed the church the very remedy it is seeking at the Supreme Court: eligibility for taxpayer money.
RELATED: Neil Gorsuch could help religious schools get public funding
Yet Greitens’ action is troubling. He is imperiling the religious freedom of both his state’s churches and his citizens. For more than 200 years, houses of worship in America have successfully relied on contributions given voluntarily by members and supporters. This arrangement has done wonders for religion in America. Voluntary funding has created a robust, diverse faith community.
By contrast, taxpayer funding of churches is extremely problematic for a number of reasons. For starters, it violates the fundamental right of conscience to compel people to support a religion with which they don’t agree. Anger over compulsory support for ministers and churches led to the creation of the principle of separation of church and state by statesmen like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. We shouldn’t return to a system that our founders found antithetical to liberty.
Taxpayer funding of religion also is a recipe for discrimination. Government is bound to play favorites in deciding which churches get funding. At the same time, congregations could end up compromising their spiritual beliefs for fear that criticism of government officials would negatively impact their funding stream. And faith leaders may even find themselves enmeshed in politics, as congregations are tempted to support those politicians who promise to direct money the churches’ way.
And with government money comes government oversight. Once houses of worship begin accepting taxpayer dollars, they must be accountable to the taxpayers for how that money is spent. Churches currently are free from such financial oversight and government entanglement — why change that?
[ad number=“2”]
The principle of church-state separation has protected religious freedom since the founding of our country. We’re allowed to choose our religious beliefs as our consciences dictate and worship accordingly without government interference. We all are able to choose which churches and charities we support through our deeds and donations, and we don’t have to worry about our tax dollars supporting religious missions we may not believe in. The Trinity Lutheran case seeks to upend a system of proven worth and replace it with a modern form of church taxes.
Trinity Lutheran Church may be in Missouri, but the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision — assuming that the court doesn’t dismiss the case as moot — could be felt across the country because three-quarters of the states have constitutional provisions like Missouri’s. A broad ruling by the Supreme Court could require states to ignore their own constitutions and direct taxpayer money to churches, synagogues, mosques and other houses of worship — opening a Pandora’s box that puts our religious freedom at risk.
[ad number=“3”]
I’m not alone in my fears – like Americans United for Separation of Church and State, nearly 20 civil liberties and faith-based organizations submitted or joined legal briefs asking the Supreme Court to uphold Missouri’s right to refuse to fund religious groups.
These groups are speaking out because they know that voluntary support for religion has served our nation well. Both freedom of conscience and church autonomy stand to lose if the Supreme Court tosses that principle aside.
(The Rev. Barry W. Lynn is executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State)
Donate to Support Independent Journalism!