New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1870-04-01

Lords Prayer at the commencement OF the
morning session in most Common Schools
This may be objected to by an avowed Atheist !;
but why by any otherf That prayer Is as
purely theistic as any ever made; we oeheVe
it is claimed by the Jews as in substance one
used by them long before Jesus OF Nazareth
was born: there is not trace OF dlstinctVeiy
Christian theology found in it, We are not
insisting on its use in our Common Schools
we are only urging the fact that 1t contains
nothing which Hebrew or Deist' a hoiha,'S'
or Nationalist, might not heartily accept Leu
it be no longer recited where the majority
prefer that it should not be; but we are con-
fitlent that no enlightened conscience was ever
offended by its repetition.
As to the uso of the Bible in Common
Schools, we do not regard the reading OF lew
(or many verses from the Scriptures as an act
of worship, nor as in any manner involving al
assumption that those Scriptures are Dlvlnely
inspired. or of any special authority. Still, we
would force no ones conscience; and, If there
be a parent who objects to the repetition OF
the Lords Prayer, or to the reading OF the
Scriptures, by his children, we would nave
them excused therefrom; and, if there be
common school where majority of the parents
prefer some other version Of the Scriptures to
that in general use, or prefer that there shall
be no PRAYER and no Bible reading, we would
have their choice respected. 1t seems to us an
unreasonable exaction that the Bible shall DE
the only book that may not be read IN our
Common Schools or that the teacher and those
pupils who see fit to unite therein should be
forbidden to repeat prayer so brief and so
thoroughly catholic Chat is, UNIVERSAL In Its
scope and bearing as that commended by Jesus
of Nazareth; but if any one detects trace OF
proselytism in any or all of these usages, we
would have them forborne, at least so far as he
is concerned.
For Common Schools seem to us as vital to
our political system as air is to the human
frame; and we cannot give them up. We
would cOncede anything in reason that does
not involve their destruction; but that we must
resist at all hazards and to the last extremity.
We do not quarrel with parish schools, nor
with private schools of any kind but we IN
sst that the State shall be charged with the
support of none but Common Schools.
For whenever we conccde that religious de-
nominations may establish schools and draw
their support from taxation. We cOncede what
will rend our Schools into n thousand frag-
ments and so distract the people that mil
lions will be deprived of any schooling what
ever. The moment it is settled that Roman
Catholics may establish Schools of their own,
and draw on the State or the taxpayers OF
diverse creeds for their support, we shall have
a hundred sects following the pernicious exam
pie, and arguing. with irresistible cogency,
that their rights are the same as those of any
other denomination, though that be by far the
more numerous. To say .that there must be
separate Schools for the children of Catholics,
Baptists, Presbyterians Episcopalians Univer-
salsts, Jews, Ratonalists, &c, &C., is virtually
to say that, for the greater number OF our rural
population, there shall he no schools at all.
And that we cannot, must not, assent to.