The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1913-12-20
BIBLE READING I'm THE
PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

| A AN0POAAoC W q 10y ACOG 1O1 dL
opinion as to the legality of read
ing the Bible in the public schools
OF Minnesota, Attorney Genera
Lyndon A. Smith, has declared
that the practice is unconstitu
tional. This opinion is substan
TALLY the same as that Of other
Attorneys General Of this State
who have been asked to pass upo1
the matter.
During III. w. Childs' tenure oil
office as Attorney General he was
requested by W. w. Pendergast
State Superintendent Of Public
Instruction, to give a ruling on
this question, and on December
10, 1895, he issued the following
statement: cit is the purpose OF
the law in this State to permit no
intrusion into our public schools
of any religious teachings what
soever. They are to be kept purely
secular in character, and as places
where the children Of parents of
every shade. of religious belief may
assemble for purposes Of instruc-
ton in authorized subjects. y y y
In view of the decision by the Wis
consin court you are advised that
the practice (of Bible reading in
the public schools4, however fire.
quently tolerated Or INDUCED in,
is violative of theIConstitution. "
Four years later, Attorney Gen
eral Douglas, endorsing this
opinion, declared that the practice
of reading the Bible in the public
school was in violation Of Section
16, Article 1, Of the Minnesota
Constitution, which says that emo
one shall be compelled to attend,
erect, or support, any place of
worship"
The recent ruling Of Attorney
General Smith is confrmatory of
these opinions. 81 have to say, "
says the opinion, that the late
Attorney General I'll. W. Childs
held in substance that the Bible
could not be used in the public
schools. That decision has been
recognized in this State without
being questioned in the courts.
He adds: 81 am of the opinion
that the question of the use of the
Bible in the public schools is not a
question open to the decision of
the Attorney General, but only to
the decision of a court of com
petent jurisdiction"
These opinions leave to room for
doubt that the reading of the
Bible in the public schools must
be regarded as unconstitutional
and illegal until such time as a
court Of competent jurisdiction
hands down a different decision in
the matter. 1t is the duty Of the
Attorney General to state the law
when requested to do SO and, like
wise, the duty of all concerned to
obey the law. This means, of
course, the elimination of what
ever religious teaching is now
being given in the public schools
for Bible reading is regarded as
synonymous with religious instruc-
ton. Some of the daily papers of
the Twin Cities have expressed
regret that it is so, but there seems
to be no way out of the difficulty
1t is unfortunate that the pub
lie school system of the United
States is in such a deplorable po-
sition in regard to the religious
instruction Of the pupils who
patronize it. The whole matter is
most perplexing problem. We
have to admit that under our laws
religious instruction is not to be
tolerated in the schools. In the
present state of public opinion we
do not see where a remedy can be
found.
As a matter of fact our whole
public school system is radically
wrong in this-that it puts an alb
solute ban on religious teaching
and gives over the youth of the
land to agnosticism and material
ism. The difficulty viii never be
cured until serious change IS