Untitled article by A. F. Ballenger

Pacific Press Publishing Company · New York · September 25, 1890

FromThe American Sentinel, Vol. 5, No. 38

Public Schools.

By A. F. Ballenger

WHAT ARE THEY? FOR WHAT PURPOSE MAINTAINED?

OUR system of free public schools is now legally established in all the States, and supported by a strong public sentiment. The public school has myriads of friends, and but few avowed enemies. There is, however, a misconception, on the part of some, as to what they are, and for what purpose they are maintained. Some regard the public schools as semi-religious, originated and maintained for the purpose of teaching, among other things, the doctrines of the Christian religion. Without stopping to show how impossible it would be, in this land of every diversity of creed, from that of the Mussulman to that of the Methodist, to teach a religion without doing violence to some tax-payer’s ideas of the only true faith, let us examine the origin and intent of the public schools.

The civil Government has created and maintained the public school for self-preservation. Ignorance may prolong the existence of a despotic form of government, but the stability of a republic in which the responsibility of government rests on all alike, depends upon the intelligent action of the mass of the people. Realizing this, each State has made provision for the maintenance of a system of free public schools, by universal taxation,—Protestants, Catholics, Jews, and infidels being taxed alike for their support. The public school rests upon the foundation of political necessity. It has in view, not only the happiness and well-being of the individual, but the preservation of the State, and is therefore a purely civil institution maintained for political purposes,—neither in the interest of, nor in opposition to, religion. The public schools, as a part of our governmental policy, come under Lincoln’s definition of government; they are “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” They are neither by nor for the Protestant, the Catholic, nor the infidel, as such, but are for the people, without reference to religion.

It is an undisputed principle in political economy, that the State may appropriate money raised by taxation to purposes which are only of general necessity or of supreme utility, and which can be attained by the State only, or by the State to a degree or in a way very superior to those of private effort. It is on this principle that the State refuses to require the teaching of religion in the public school supported by general taxation. The teaching of religion is not an object to be attained by the State only, neither can the objects of religion be attained by the State to a degree or in a way superior to those of private effort. All history proves that the State, as a teacher of religion, is a disastrous failure. In placing the common school on a purely civil basis, the State does not, in any way, antagonize religion. It is simply an acknowledgment that the teaching of religion is outside its jurisdiction; that religion is a matter not to be handled by the State.

While this view of the public school is regarded by the majority as self-evident, there are some who, because of this attitude of our schools toward religion, declare that they are “godless.” This comes from a misconception of the province of civil Government, and the mission of the public school. Had God delegated to civil Government the teaching of religion, a failure to do it by means of the public school might merit such criticism. The State, in providing for the teaching of reading, writing, and mathematics, without teaching religion, is simply attending to its legitimate business, which the Church does when it attends to the teaching of religion. The term godless cannot be applied with any more consistency to the common school because the Bible is not read and religion is not taught in it, than it can be to schools of phonography, telegraphy, or art, because the Bible is not taught in them, or than the term traitor can be applied to the Church, because it does not teach the principles of civil government, civil engineering, and military tactics.

The unparalleled success achieved by our system of free public schools, is due in great part to their freedom from that disturbing element, religious controversy. Had our public schools taught a system of religion which antagonized the beliefs of the Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, Universalists, Unitarians, Jews, or infidels, they would not have been supported and patronized as they are to-day. When the course of study in the public schools is confined to secular instruction, and the teaching of religion is left to the parent, the denominational school, and the Church, all classes can patronize them. But let religion be taught, and all whose views of religion are antagonized, are compelled, in self-defense, to withdraw their children from the schools which they are taxed to maintain. Our public schools have been, and ever will be, the main arteries through which is furnished the life-blood of our glorious Republic; and, in view of this, should be carefully guarded against the introduction of anything which is foreign to them, and destructive of their usefulness.—A. F. Ballenger, in N. R. L. A. Leaflet.