The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1905-03-22
Father Regrets Disregard
Of Religious instruction

To the Editor OF The Washington Times:
On the question of religious instruc-
ton in the public schools. it seems TO
me that the trnuble with cur people Is
not a lack of moral knowledge. but
living in direct contravention of well
known laws of morality, The air is
surcharged with moral and religious in
struction There Is probably no human
being of sound mind in this country
who could plead Ignorance at the bar
of heaven of the fundamental laws OF
spiritual and moral life The truth
rather is. that they are SO familiar. and
have so long been violated by genera
tons. that a heredity has been acquired
that sets them at pought. or regards
them as OF no consequence
This evil cannot be got at in the public
schools. A perfunctory and formal rat
Ting off of Scripture passages and COM
n,andments. already too well known,
will only confirm present needlessness,
and add 10. rather than lessen, moral
culpability.
Our children's misfortune is 10 live
! in a moral atmosphere rife with knowl-
edge but foul from disregard of that
knowledge, and consequently more bane-
full to the human soul than absolute
ignorance.
uhere of the home and the street that
tells. Where this is at fault there Is
only one piece of machinery that can
couuteract it, and that is the church.
Rut where does the church stand in this
grave matter? Docs it teach that man
is saved by works OF Righteousness
Not a bit of it. but rather that man IS
saved by mere belief in the merits OF
Christ Salvation by faith is Its cry:
and not salvation by righteousness OF
life Children are taught the COM
manGIaents. aud in the very next breath
are told they are not contrlbutorY 10
salvation. On the most fundamental
articles of faith there is disagreement
among the clergy How many of them
! know who their God Is?
Their Bible says Jesus Christ was God
incarnated; that he was God manifested
to men In flesh; that he was the Ever
Tow many of them believe and preach
this? Do they not say that he was a
mere man. the son of Joseph. highly
gifted with the Holy Spirit. or that
these three beings are after all but one
being? What do they teach. in effect.
but q polytheism in monotheism. which
is an absurdity. They say at one time
that God is one being. and that this
one being is three: and at another they
declare that God is three beings, but
that these three beings are one being.
Such reasoning would not be accepted
in any other line of thought Asked to
define this God. they say he is a being
without body parts. and passions. which
is the best definition of nothing that
can be given They profess to be
masters in Israel; but how many of
them can tell you anything positive
about the other life or the laws of life
| which prevail there? You might as well
/ go out and put the question to Your
brick wall as 10 ask them. They fail
utterly 70 see their God in Jesus Christ
| The old Jews recognized his claim bet
ter than these moderns. for they said
man. made himself God John X :33l. not
| a part of God. but God himself.
| Religion TO them is really something
outside OF man. not a creation within
| him, not gradual uppuilding OF spiri-
tnal structure. It is all oues