OCR Text |
Show RELIGION IN THE SCHOOLS. rhiimii-itiiiiii rr-3. There is a pint (li nl of nonsense talked about religion in t lie juililic sciinols by those who on other aulijeits seem to lie cililoued wlih strong common souse. Kvery true American, kuowini; that the public school is the one yri nt solvent of our heterogeneous ntttiiMiulitics, wisliea to preserve it in nil its integrity, unit the, only wny to do this is fur I all sects in keep lunula ott. Those theiiUiiiius who talk so glibly about the. country beinir Christian fnrsret tlmt aninnir the must tmnorable and most trusted of our eltizeus are those to whom the Hebrew He-brew reliirion is n Lve belief. 'I'liuse who tnake sin li n foieible uiumeut for reliirion in tlie seliniila iirimrc the fact that the rliild in only under the Inlliieiue of tho acuunl 11 part, of the day, w hieli in some eases only liuioiints to oiie tliird of it. Aijaiu, the eliild is only at school live days out of seven, nilil enjoys the Ion i; summer vacation, Christ-tuna Christ-tuna week, und other holidays, so that for the whole year the school has iibmit one. third of the child's lime, while tie, church anil home have the reiuaiuinir two-thirds. Character, it is well known, is more surely formed by influences outside the cirrieiiluin than by studies themselves. This is true of the college and university, und is equally true of tue public school. When it is remembered re-membered that tho greater portion of the child's time is under home and church influences, influ-ences, it can be seen that the cry for religious or sectarian instruction in the "public school is not only unwise In n country where relitr-ions relitr-ions freedom is iruarnuterd by the constitution, constitu-tion, but is also unnecessary. Another thin;: the advocate of religion in tlie s 1 1-, oierlook is that, as at present constituted, the studies and the influence, of the schools are not inliilelie, material, or ineliirious. (In the contrary, tlie little bits of vers", the selection of prose in the read-im; read-im; books all lu-cathe n pure morality and spirituality that cannot but imprcss'child-ren, imprcss'child-ren, even it they at their tender years know m it ti in ir of dogmas, Jor doctrines, or theological distinctions. liev. Dr. Charles A. Dickev of this city, as interviewed in the ',,. seems to have" the riu'lit idea of it. lie Mi.vs: "If our public school Hero teni'liintr irrrlitrion 1 would sny. iinike tin-in slop, but ,u their main time is Christina, I don't see what cause we can liuvc for complaint. I can't see how relli;. ioiH instruction can be yiven ill the schools, hi the first place, man v of the ti'iichei-s nro not capable of givlin; it, and nine chimera out of ten thic would iiruoruntly teach falsi; doctrine. Then, even if they were, whfit shall they teach? The Bible? Well, if 1 didn't believe in the llib'e or w asn't a Chris, tian I would object to luivini; it taught, and I'd ike to have my wishes jut as uiucU re-rpei re-rpei le t a any one." If the lending clergymen would approach tlie subject more, from l)r. Dickey's altitude intend of from a strictly sectarian one, the cause of morality and spirituality would be greatly advanced. Sur-ly when'tliu ehun li und liiiine have t.Mi tliinN of the child's time, if they il i not improve their opportunities oppor-tunities it is nut f;1ir in this country of re liifious liberty lo insi .t that the school i-hall make up for llieir slior!comiui.'s. To force the issue U t-i (lestrny Ihe autonomy und iu-depeiub iu-depeiub ncc of the si hool-, ami w ill lead to a chaotic state, from which not even the ablest educators can evolve order. |