RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOL.
Its Latest Phase in Washington.
(From our Washington correspondent.) AT this writing (March 24), the status of the religion-in-the-public-schools issue in Washington is as follows: The public discussion of the matter has somewhat subsided, pending the circulation of petitions for and against the adoption, by the board of education, of the recommendation made to it by the conference of churchmen, and the presentation of these petitions to the board. It is expected that these petitions will be presented to the board at its next meeting, on March 29, and that some action with reference to the matter will then follow by the board. The president of the board has already expressed his agreement with the desires of those demanding the introduction of specific religious teaching. The matter may be submitted by the board to a referendum of the parents of the school children. Such a plan has been proposed by the Washington Times, which has been giving special attention to the matter during the past week, and has been approved in interviews by several members of the board of education. The method of taking the referendum, as proposed by the Times, is for the board to prepare a circular letter of inquiry, and transmit copies to the teachers, who, through the children, are to send a copy of the letter to every household represented in the schools, with instructions that the letter must be returned within a day or two, when all replies will then be returned to the board. While declaring that "the responsibility to decide the controversy over the introduction of moral training, upon a distinctly religious foundation, into the curriculum of the public-schools, rests finally with the authorities in control of the schools—the board of education and the District Commissioners, especially that member of the Board of Commissioners who supervises the schools directly"—the Times is of the opinion that before they act in the matter, the authorities would do wisely to obtain the fullest possible expression from the parents of the pupils, as they are the persons whose interests are vitally affected, and "are, after all, the only persons who can speak as of right" in the matter. This referendum, in the opinion of the Times, would contribute greatly to satisfy the parents with the decision finally reached by the board, and "would almost certainly preclude what now seems to be an inevitable remonstrance against any decision of the board." After holding its columns open a week for the discussion of the subject, the Times, on March 22, announced that no further communications would be published, as, "in the newspaper sense," the communications already published had "exhausted the subject," having "presented it in every reasonable light." Regret was expressed that it had been impossible to give space to "a great number of letters" received during the week's discussion, "many of them giving expression of strong argument and deep interest." As was virtually stated in its editorial inviting the discussion, it seems to have been the desire of the Times to get the expression of the sentiment favoring the scheme proposed. But it was noticeable that most of the communications published were from opponents of the scheme, and it is reasonable to infer that most of the communications received were against the demand of the church conference. But probably this had nothing to do with the almost abrupt closing of its columns to communications on the subject by the Times. From present indications, the question of religion in the schools will be pending for some weeks at least, and the question is not likely to disappear entirely, whatever action the board of education may take. The petitions to be presented to the board of education are being circulated by the Seventh-day Adventists on one hand, and by a committee representing the church conference on the other. The Adventists are making quite a thorough canvass for signatures throughout the city, but it is announced by the chairman of churchmen's committee that they propose "to attempt a long, but rather strong, petition of representative men." A circular letter accompanying their petition, asks that "each pastor shall get the signatures of ten members of his congregation," the most influential members, of course. The signatures to the Adventist petitions will, no doubt, be far more representative of the common people. The text of the petition being circulated by the committee representing the churchmen, reads: For improved moral teaching in the schools.
This is not a proposal to do something new, but to do in a more effective way what is now required by law. Teachers in the District of Columbia are required by rule 46, to "inculcate truthfulness, self-control, temperance, frugality, industry, obedience to parents, and obedience to the laws of God;" and it is also required that the Bible shall be read and the Lord's Prayer repeated in the public schools. Those who sign this petition only ask that this moral teaching shall be carefully prepared by the board of education, instead of leaving the details of selection and explanation to each teacher. Manifestly, the new plan diminishes the opportunity for any teacher to inject his personal views.
To the Board of Education:
We, the subscribers, citizens of the District of Columbia, beg leave most respectfully to petition your honorable body, in the interests of good citizenship, to introduce into the public schools under your control, the following studies, to-wit:
The Ten Commandments.
Their recognized summary: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbor as thyself."
The systematic study of ethics, as applied to conduct, approved by the board of education.
And we beg further, respectfully to suggest that your board take steps to provide a course of readings taken from the Bible, the use of which shall be optional with the teachers.
These suggestions are made with the proviso that there should be no sectarian religious teaching in the schools, and that any parent who may desire to withdraw a child from the instruction above suggested, should have liberty to do so. The text of the petition being circulated by the Seventh-day Adventists, reads: A remonstrance against the teaching of religion in the public schools of the District of Columbia.
Inasmuch as the recent interdenominational conference has adopted an action, by a majority vote, urging that religious instruction be made a part of the courses of study in the public schools of the District of Columbia, and a petition is now being circulated to make this action effective, we, the undersigned, adult residents of this District, do most respectfully petition the honorable board of education not to introduce the teaching of religion into the public schools:
Because it is a violation of the Christian principle of the separation of church and state.
Because it will necessarily infringe upon the rights of certain classes of citizens.
Because it is a menace to religious freedom, and a departure from that generous policy which has made this nation great.
Because the use of money raised by compulsory taxation of all classes of citizens for the purpose of teaching religion, is contrary to the just principles of civil government.
Because it will necessarily establish a state theology, and make a religious test necessary for the holding of the office of public trust as a teacher, which is a violation of one of the provisions of the Constitution.
Because religion, or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, is a matter of individual conscience, and can only be directed by reason and conviction.
Because the teaching of religion does not come within the purview of the state, but belongs to the home, the church, and the private school supported entirely by private contribution. This remonstrance makes out a strong case against religious teaching in the schools, notwithstanding its conciseness.