Iron County register., 1882-08-24
gran Caanty Register.
Ministers as Teachers in Public
Schools.

IRoNroN, No., Aug. 5, 1882.
Editor Reyister-Since my name, in con-
neNiOn with school matters here, has ire
quently appeared in the columns OF your
paper, 1 may possibly he allowed space III
which to set forth my views, although tnes
be at variance with some OF those ALREADY
published. First, allow me to correct 1ne
erroneous impression that School Boards are
required to advertise for teachers: tlfit may
be "custom"in some places but not law. In
MANY places where the school interests are
quite as s,sartled as in Southeast Missouri,
the Board tenders the position to some well
known or well recommended teacher, who
NAV not have applied for the position; they
being satisfied ON good authority oil the
teachers ability, both to instruct and govern
the school. There il no point OF law requlr-
Ing the Board to advertise for teachers. 1t
is well known that such 4 course succeeds IN
bringing number of applications, none OF
which i'm many instances prove acceptable.
The action of the Borrd in electirfg me to the
PrinCipalship of the school was not illegal in
consequence of their ignoring published
notice of ~ meeting of the Board TO select q
Principal, as that notice was not officially
authorized. have never known such pub
licity given to the actions of School Board
i'm the election of a teacher, rs has been given
to ours III the columns of the REGISTER
naming candidates and names of members
voting for each. No possible good can come
of such action being published; the mere re-
suit is sufficient. But connected with that
report WIS Il severe criticism touching the ac-
ton of the Board in electing minister to
the charge of the schools, under cover of "a
tendency to unite Church and State"
Now, Mr.. Editor, permit me to say in all
candor, do not think you had one particle
of fear as to that matter; it was mere pre-
text, set forth to crafty and bolster up Il
feeling tolarept here which is not favorable
either to ministers or public schools. There
Is about is much room for fear in the matter
referred to as there is truth in the exposition
of the law made by member of the bar
that ''the law prohibits the employment of a
minister to teach in the public schools"
Now this is so gauzy that any one can see
through and far beyond 1t. However true
and correct the voice of the REGISTER may
be concerning other matters, evidently 1t Is
on the wrong side of this question, and will
build up an unwarranted prejudice against
the ministry. Personally, have no feeling
in this matter, but treat it on general princi-
Piles and consult the highest interests of our
public school system, upon the success of
which largely depends the glorious future of
our country. Your position indicates how
easily we'll meaning and interested persons
may be led astray concerning unimportant
matters: certainly your conclusions in this
matter have been reached without looking
OH all sides Of the question. You say: "The
employment of clergymen in public free
schools is contrary to the spirit and inimical
to the highest efficiency of the system.o You
offer no argument in support of the asser-
ton, hence we are left to define the reason
why. 1t cannot be because the clergy are
not qualified to Instruct or govern. You in
innate, at least, th;ft such is not the ease in
this instance, and there is no intimation that
am an exception. The sole ground Of OBJ
lection must be that denominatiOnal or Sec
tarfan views, or religious principles of some
nature, may be enSrafted by these "much- to-
be-fesred teachers. This objection sub bdi-
vidcs itself into two parts, reflccting, first,
against the minister, and, second, against his
religious principles. To maintain the for
mer-i. e., that he would use his position to
propagate dcnominationaI interests-would
be to accord dishonesty to him: zeal for
sect to the prejudice of public or general in
terests; to charge him with proselyting, which |
Is severely denounced, both in the scriptures |
and, may say, by all Protestant ministers
who have sufficient benevolence to induce |
them to engage i'm the thankless work Of
schoof-teaching. If a man in any civil office
uses his position to serve his individual or
sectarian purposes, he is denounced, and it Is |
u rare exception to see an Office so subverted.
Are ministers less careful than othersf Are
they more devoid of principle? 1 maintain
that they are not. To fear the second or lat
ter result. e., "that religious principles Of
some nature may be engrafted"-is to indi-
cate abhorrence of scripture truth In addi-
ton to attributing dishonesty to the clergy.
This is an unfortunate position, and one |
which do not think you can afford to main
tain; besides, the case has yet to be recorded
where Protestant minister serving as a
teacher In public free schools has turned his |
attention from the duties Of his position to |
making converts to his faith. To be consist |
ent, this theory must urge Its objection
against the employment of any true Christian
rs teacher. The difference between minis |
ter and an ordinary Christian is not in point |
of piety. or conservation to Gods service, for
all are bought with the same price, and ALI
are influenced by the same Spirit and coun-
seled by the same Word. Christianity argues |
a change of heart-a change Of purpose in |
from the world, its habits |
and am,Isements, so far as they conflict with |
Christian life. The minister is not of high |
er order of beings, who cannot condescend to
work at other things than those pertaining to |
the sacred officr, though ordinarily his entire |
time is claimed and required by his official
duties. He is ordained to an important |
trust, and in all he does, Is expected to evil
dence his fitness TO his work by abstaining
from all appearance Of evil.
Now, there il as much danger of true
fnriy.tal Christian DRFyertinU the minds of