Echoes

Francis Cardinal Spellman's blast against Eleanor Roosevelt (TIME, Aug. 1) raised loud echoes last week. Public reactions were as might have been expected: Protestants supported Mrs. Roosevelt's position; Catholic spokesmen backed up the cardinal's criticism.

Lutherans took issue with the cardinal on a matter of fundamental principle: the separation of church and state, "a cherished ideal of all American Lutherans since they first arrived on American soil 300 years ago." Lutherans did not seek federal aid to education, declared Dr. John W. Behnken, president of the Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod, the most conservative of the large Lutheran groups.* Even if the Government should offer help to private schools, Dr. Behnken said, "there must be a clear understanding that no Government assistance can be given to support the instructional program of church schools. If there is no such understanding, the Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod would consider it very unwise to accept any aid from the Government."

Careful Reading. "If Mrs. Roosevelt's discussion were really anti-Catholic," Dr. Behnken reasoned, "it would be anti-Lutheran, too. Lutherans have as much enthusiasm for protecting the best interests of their church, their schools and their children as the Roman Catholics have. Careful reading of Mrs. Roosevelt's statements in her discussion of federal aid to schools convinces us that they were not hostile to religion or to any individual church."

Other Protestant leaders and groups sided with the Lutherans. In Nashville, Tenn., the 20th annual convention of Southern Baptist colleges and schools passed a resolution deploring "this unwarranted criticism" and officially regretting the action of the "distinguished American churchman." In Boston, the American Unitarian Association cited its record of opposition to "any legislation that would compromise the traditional principle of church and state," and to any groups "who would try to secure public money . . . for their private institutions."

In Manhattan, Episcopal Bishop Charles K. Gilbert defended Mrs. Roosevelt on more personal grounds, criticizing Cardinal Spellman's attack as "bitter and unjust," and adding: "I desire to associate myself with Mrs. Roosevelt in the sentiments she has expressed, which will be shared, I am confident, by multitudes of loyal and fair-minded citizens."

Spiritual v. Temporal. Following the first reply in her newspaper column, Eleanor Roosevelt made public an answering letter to the cardinal.

"Anyone who knows history, particularly the history of Europe," she wrote, "will, I think, recognize that the domination of education or of government by any one particular religious faith is never a happy arrangement for the people.

"Spiritual leadership should remain spiritual leadership, and the temporal power should not become too important in any church . . .

"I can assure you that I have no prejudice ... I have no intention of attacking you ... or of attacking the Roman Catholic Church, but I shall, of course, continue to stand for the things in our Government which I think are right."

The Vatican seemed ready to give Cardinal Spellman full backing. An unofficial source announced: "There is no doubt that if Cardinal Spellman deemed his intervention necessary as an expression of the church, it was necessary, and is therefore approved. The intervention of the cardinal is undoubtedly not directed against the person, but rather against the acts of the person. If those acts deserved a reprimand, then the reprimand is sage."

* And the group supporting the biggest system of parochial schools in American Protestantism (1,204 fulltime elementary schools), also nine high schools and 13 preparatory schools.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.