Ellsworth American. [volume] (Ellsworth, Me.) 1855-current, 1876-02-03
The School Question

presented series OF propositions on the
subject OF schools, which have awakened
very wide and various comment, and Civ
en- the American people something to think
OF. lie recommends an amendment to the
Constitution, which shall require every
State
First. To establish and forever maintain
Free Public Schools for the education OF
every child;
Second, To forbid In those schools the
teaching of religious. atheistic, or pagan
tsnets;
Third, To prohibit the granting of any
school funds or school taxes to any reilly
ious sect or denomination.
wei. we are glad that the President has
made these recommendations. # is better
10 meet the issues involved now than al n
later period. They were sure to come. In
some cities and States they had already
come, and had even thus early shown that
they were vital, and that they held within
themselves the menace of the public tran
guilty.
But the sword which our soldier Presi-
dent wields is double-edged one Ii holds
about as keen an edge for the Protestant
as for the Catholic. The former will be
Obliged to relinquish his Bible as a school.
book, while the latter will be compelled to
give up his plans for getting possession of
the public funds tor educating his children
In hointerests OF his Church. We hardly
know which will suffer the greater grief.
Mach as we desire, for the sake of the mo-
ralities which it inculcates. the presenc.
OF the Bible in our public schools, we can
easily see that there can be no successful.
or even rational, fight with the Catholics
In their attempt TO get hold of the public
moneys for their own denominational edu-
cation, until We come to the practical con-
ciusion that the State has nothing 10 do
with religious education. To the Catho-
lie, to the jew, to the atheist,-anl we have
the children OF all these in our public
schools, the compulsory reading Of the
Bible IS grievance. hardship. an oppres-
sion. II Is one Of the things we cannot rea-
son about or reason against. These peo-
pie cannot be made to see that the author
itative moralities Of the Bible are all that
We are after, and that their children will
be the better for them. 10 the Catholic,
the Bible, even in the Catholic version, is
. book only TO be presented and interpret
ed by the Priest to the Jew, the New Tes-
lament contains the record of a false
Christ; and to the atheist and infidel, the
whole book is but bundle OF lies and su.
perstitiOns.
One thing is certain, viz, that the claim
OF the Catholics for portion of the school
money, to be expended in schools. estab-
lished and carried on in the interests of
their Church, involves the existence of
public schools. The moment single claim
OF this kind is granted, the whole public
school systematic education Of all the
children as measure Of State policy-will
go by the board. If the Catholic has this
privilege, the Protestant will claim it, the
jew will claim it-even the inidel and pa
gan will claim it and they will claim it
with just as much right AS the Catholic.
The Claim Is utterly and forever inadmissi-
Bile. Ii is SO preposterous that ii can hard
ly have respectful consideration. Whether
It is crowded, in some quarters, simply for
the purpose OF showing PrOtestants that
able, we cannot tell but, surely, the Cath
Olics cannot seriously suppose that their
claim tor division OF public moneys can
be granted. They ought to know that, if
the question concerning it were put to the
American people to-day, it would be decid.
ed Overwhelmingly against them.
Practically, the great question which the
President has presented to the American
people concerns the Protestant far more
than it does the Catholic. If such an
amendment to the Constitution as he pro-
poses should be effected in all its details,
the Catholic will gain all that it was ever
~ no POWCt W gam HIS SUuTCn from
| constitutional provision or legislative &C.
ton. VIZ. the exclusion Of the Bible from
the public schools. The scheme for q d.
vision OF the public funds was never prac-
ticable-was never even possible. 1t is
not likely to be possible. A constitutional
provision which would make 1t impossible
In law would not change the actual status
OF the matter, SO that the provision would
leave the Catholic just exactly where he
stands to-day. and where he will be likely
to stand in this country until the end Of
| time.
Ahd yet II is undoubtedly true that, so
long as the Bible is u reading book in the
| public schools, hot only the Catholic. but
all unbelievers in the Bible, will have q
reason for complaints that the public funds
are used to teach their children a religion
which they do not believe in. What shall
we DO about it?-we whose reverence for
the Bitle was imbibed with the milk OF our
christian mOthers-wOmen who cherished
the BOOK as the sweet, wholesome, verita-
Die Word Of the Great God? 1t will be hard
for us to say that 1t must 90 out of the
schools. We'll, would we be willing to see
the Douay Bible put in its placei No?
Why not? Are we willing to force our
version upon the Catholics when we would
not submit to have their version forced
upon us? Would we care to have only so
much OF the Bible in the schools as the
Jew would acceptY No? Then what right
have we to force upon the Jew that part
Of our Bible which he will not accept?
For ourselves, we must confess to a
change Of convictions upon this matter. 1t
has not been arrived at hastily. We have
been long and openly upon the other side.
In regard to the desirableness Of the Bible
IN the public schoels, we have no question
now. We never did advocate its presence
there, save for the divine influence OF its
Christian m0ralities. We never did sup.
pose that the State should teach religion
We have no union of Church and State In
this country, and we do not believe 10 It
anywhere. Only Is matter Of wise poll
cy. and on. purely moral grounds, have we
ever advocated the presence Of the Bible
| In tho ach0ola q fka record ~ I, ~, sNas,n