A Clear Line Between Church and State
By Editor
THE editor of Missions, the Baptist organ for foreign missions, speaks out plainly as to the attitude all Protestants should assume toward the encroachments of the Roman Catholic Church upon the liberties assured by American principles of separation of church and state. Under the title of "A Time to Speak Out," in the April number, he says:— "As our readers know, we are not in the habit of making attacks upon the religious faith of people. When we have anything to say against the Roman Catholic Church, it is because that organization is political as well as religious. When it appears in politics, and introduces church into state in any form, it deserves to be treated like any other assailant of human liberty. This is the perilous and insidious side of a great ecclesiastical system, which is not content to enjoy American liberty and leave our free institutions alone. "The case in point which calls for a strong expression of opinion on the part of the people is that of our government Indian schools. In some of these schools, which were taken over by the government from the Roman Catholics, nuns and sisters teach, and have been teaching, in their religious garb, which is in direct conflict with the laws of the United States. The Indian Commissioner, in view of this infraction of the law, issued an order forbidding the wearing of any religious garb or insignia in the schools after a given date, stating that if any teachers could not conscientiously forego the garb, their service for the government would terminate with the school year. President Taft revoked this order, after he had heard from the Roman ecclesiastical authorities in protest, and without granting a hearing to the Indian Committee of the Home Missions Council, which represents the twenty millions of Protestant church-members. "At present, therefore, in disobedience to the laws of the country, Catholic nuns and sisters teach in Indian schools and wear their churchly garb. They also teach religion outside of school hours, which is legally permissible. To all intents and purposes, this makes a Roman Catholic school for which the government is paying. The Indians are helpless, although some of the parents protest against having their children thus taught. And the Roman Catholic influence at the national capital is powerful enough to overrule a government officer who endeavors to maintain the law. "Such incidents are greatly to be regretted. They do not make for harmonious feeling of good citizenship. Church and state have been kept apart in this country, and they are going to be, at all hazards. Public-school moneys will not be appropriated to support sectarian schools. Such attempts as this in the Indian schools will prove disastrous boomerangs to all who undertake them. The American people can not long be deceived in matters of this kind. We can easily tolerate church princes and all kinds of boasting and display, but when it comes to the dearly bought religious liberties of the people and the fundamental principle of absolute separation of church and state, there is no doubt about the issue. We are deeply sorry that a President who is a strenuous upholder of law should take a position so out of harmony with his usual ideals and practise of justice."