The thread down below will be closed and you may comment, if you wish, on this thorough post by Matthew Fish

SLU avoids violating the Federal Establishment Clause (which, apropos of Lemon v. Kurtzman means ‘excessive entanglement’ between religion and state) since it is not “an institution in which religion is so pervasive that a substantial portion of its functions are subsumed in the religious mission.”

A reading of this decision allows only two possible interpretations in my opinion:

1) Saint Louis University is only nominally Catholic or Jesuit, and despite any evidence in mission statements or what not, it is not substantially working for a religious mission, and is in fact a secular university that makes use of a few Jesuits as administrators (although always making up a minority of total administrators), and receives inspiration from the Catholic Church and Society of Jesus insofar as it assists its secular mission, “the encouragement of learning and the extension of the means of education.”

2) The Court has surprised us all with a very generous reading of the First Amendment, implying that only institutions that suffer dictatorial religious control shall not be supported by public funding. In other words, as long as the Government is not involved in the administration of a church or creed itself (which any institution serving “indoctrination” would thereby be subsumed under) it can involve itself all it wants in various religiously affiliated institutions.