Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

can politics, and of all American concerns, that religion here is to be supported by voluntary contributions. It is our glory, our joy, that religion with us is upheld by free hearts. Men may tax themselves, and I thank God they do tax themselves for the support of religion. But the state has no right to lay a tax, and to send its officers to collect it, for the support of the Christian religion.

It follows of necessity that these schools, so maintained by a tax raised by the state, are not nurseries for instruction in religion. It is acknowledged in them, it is recognized by them, that the peculiar doctrines of any one sect must not be taught in schools supported by any moneys raised by tax on the people. Hence, schools furnished by the state, provide for the education of the children, as common elementary schools, for instruction in the common branches of education, and no more. Religious education is left to the parents, to the spiritual teachers of the children, to their religious friends, schools, &c. But here no instruction is given in any doctrines peculiar to any denomination of Chris

tians.

This principle, early in the progress of the school system, was practically violated. As long as twenty years ago, the public authorities considered the question, and saw that there were violations of this primary principle, in church schools, sustained by taxes upon the people. It might happen, that if I was taxed, my money would go for the instruction of the children of Roman Catholics in their faith; it miglit happen, on the other hand, that the money of Roman Catholics would go to instruct their children in my faith. These violations of this salutary principle could not be admitted. I should have a right to say to Roman Catholics, "I will not permit you to take my money to educate your children in your faith;" and with equal right might they say to me, "We will not give our money to educate your children in your faith."

Hence it followed, that in order to provide a remedy for the violation of this principle by the church schools, these were given up; and large public schools

were organized and placed under the care of an independent company, chosen from all denominations and embracing both clergymen and laymen, to which all the children of the city should have free admission. To this arrangement the Protestant churches all submitted; the Episcopal, the Dutch Reformed, the Methodist, the Baptist, all-except the Roman Catholics-with one consent submitted to this decision. The Roman Catholics refused. They had the largest number of poor children to be educated, and they said, "We want our portion of the public money to support our own schools." We said to them, "Here are public schools, common schools, open to your children as to ours; come and partake of the privileges. We have no religion taught in these schools; we have sound morality, the general principles of what are admitted by all to be religious truth, but not the doctrines of any parti cular denomination, nothing that can of fend the prejudices of any. Come, we say to your children, to our schools; sit beside our children; listen to the same teachers, imbibe the same lessons, forget all differences, and become as brothers, as all the citizens of a nation should be." "Oh, no!" said they, "we do not like that." What is your objection to it? Are not our schools good schools? Are they not well taught? "Yes." Then why not send your children to them, and let them grow up with our children; forget all differences of birth or opinion, and melt into one American mass? "Oh, no!" said they, "this public table of yours is well furnished, and the dishes may be good; but we want private tables; we want our share of the money, and we will take care of our tables in our own way." These schools were not sufficiently religious for them; they de sired to have their children instructed not only in the common branches of education; but in the doctrines of their religion; and to do this they desired a por tion of the common school fund. Now, what was their share? They had the greatest number of children to be instructed, but they did not pay the greater part of the tax. The answer to their demand was, 'The fund was not raised to

enable you to educate your children, but to educate them. They must go to the schools provided for them. This they did not like; they wanted the money. They were told they could educate their children as they chose at their own expense. But they wanted our money to do it with.

We asked them what objection they had to our schools? They did not know; they did not like them! And finally, they said our books, our reading books, had in them a great many reflections on the Roman Catholics, and they did not wish their children to read them.

Now, we were willing to meet this with all candour. We know that, in books made up of miscellaneous articles, it could not be expected that every particular sentence should suit every member of the community. We must give and take a little in this respect. But this, however just, did not suit them, and they would not have it so. We went to work to find a remedy. Suggestions were made, and so we went to work to expurgate all that could give offence.

We

wanted their children; we wanted to educate them; we did not like them to grow up in ignorance; and so we expurgated these objectionable passages.

Mr. Ketchum here exhibited one of these expurgated editions of Murray's Reader, and pointed out the passages which had thus been stricken out; among them were a sketch of Luther's character, from Robertson's Charles V.; this line from Goldsmith's Traveller

"And e'en in penance planning sins anew:" a sentence from Lord Chatham's celebrated protest against the employment of Indian savages by the British in the Revolutionary war, in which the words "tyranny of Rome," "Popish cruelties," and "Inquisition" occurred. These were all stricken out for the sake of peace. But all would not do. Friends blamed us for having made too great sacrifices for the sake of quiet. We said we would educate these children for the safety of society; we would make Americans of them, make them think and feel as Americans about American institutions and American people. But that was not what the Roman

priests wanted; for, be it remembered that many of the Roman laity desired that it should be so. They knew that in these schools the spirit of liberty would be growing up in their children's hearts; they would begin to exercise their right of private judgment, and this might diminish their respect for their spiritual fathers. They did not wish it to be so.

All went on; they could not very well get over this, but they soon raised another objection. Said they, "We do not like your BIBLE." Our answer was, We do not instruct our children out of it; we have it in our schools, and out of respect to the religious community, to the decencies of life and the usages of all respectable society, we have a chapter read at the opening of the schools. Perhaps it would have been well to have had offered a petition to heaven; but there were objections to this; and, therefore, to please every body, we had a chapter instead. They said, "We cannot approve this; we will not have it." Our answer was, practically, We cannot give up the Bible; we will not give up the Bible! We are here as agents of the public; and if the public authorize you to say that we shall not have the Bible, we will submit; but till then we will not. And I have great satisfaction in saying that the public has taken up the question, and there is no probability that the public voice will issue the command that we shall give up the Bible. It has been said, in a public controversy between Bishop Hughes and myself, that this is a Protestant country; that we were willing that their children should come here and fare as ours do; but that this was a Protestant country, and that we love the Bible. It is a fondness we have contracted from our ancestors; they used the Bible and we have continued to use it. The answer was, that this is NOT a Protestant country! We do not admit it, said they. Now I wish to pause a moment and inquire if this is a Protestant country? France, Belgium, Italy, and other countries in Europe, are generally spoken of in geographies as Roman Catholic countries; but on the maps, the United States are put down as Protestant. Are they not? Was that Congress which recommended

the printing and distribution of the Bible a Protestant Congress, or was it not? Did Lord Chatham speak the truth when he said on the floor of the House of Lords that Indians were about to be employed in fighting their "Protestant" brethren, or did he not? We have a little documentary evidence germane to this subject; and I beg leave to read an extract from an address, in 1774, by the American Congress to the people in Great Britain:

"October 21, 1774. In Congress, at Philadelphia. Extract from the Address of Congress to the people of Great Britain

"The dominion of Canada is to be extended... that their numbers, daily swelling with Catholic emigrants from Europe, may become formidable to us, and reduce this ancient free Protestant colony to a state of slavery. Nor can we express our astonishment, that a British Parliament should ever consent to establish in this country, a religion that has deluged your island in blood, and dispersed impiety, bigotry, persecution, murder and rebellion through out every part of the world."

This address was issued by an American Congress. Were their constituents Protestants, or not? They were Protest ants. In the time of the Revolution, when struggling for civil and religious liberty, they fought as Protestants; they conquered as Protestants; and as Protestants they rejoiced over their victory At that time, then, this was a Protestant country. Now when have we lost that character? Let me ask Bishop Hughes, or any other person, to say when we ceased to be a Protestant country? I do s not know but the time may come when we shall cease to be such, but I do not

believe it; at least while the energies of
this Society are still employed, while
your agents go forth and your ministers
are at their altars as heretofore; while your
missionaries go out into the land, I do not
believe we shall cease to be a Protestant
country; and may the day be long distant
when the attempt to make this a Roman
Catholic country shall succeed!
what, in that case, have we to expect? I
will read a proclamation-since proved
to be official-lately issued in France:

And

2

[ocr errors]

and their assistants have reported their schoolmasters as having suffered to be introduced in their respective schools, Bibles and Testaments, which contain doctrines contrary to the true religion. I know that some of the teachers have permitted these books to be used, because they were deceived by the colporteurs, who told them that they were sent by me. I hasten request you to remove these dangerous books from your school. I will, without delay, in company with the priest, visit and inspect your schools, and every copy of these books that we shall find, we will cause to be burnt. I embrace this opportunity of informing you, that from this time, I will allow only three books in the rural schools, viz:

to

1. The catechism of the diocese. 2. A book of moral lessons, instructive and easy to be understood by the children. 3. A book of arithmetic.

(Signed)

L. LAFOREST,
Inspector of the Schools. &c., &c.

I desire to have it understood, that no man has a right to exaggerate these descriptions of the proceedings of Roman Catholics. I hold myself responsible for whatever I have said, for I speak what I know. I have no controversy with Raman Catholics in this country; I hope and religious liberty they have sought they may long continue to enjoy the civil here; I hope they will be happy here. But let them not seek to change our institutions. Let them not take away our Bible; for I verily believe that it is to that Bible that we are indebted for these institutions which they praise, and for the liberty we enjoy, more than to any source whatever, and to all other sources whatever. And I doubt whether what we call republican liberty could exist here or elsewhere, unless the people are instructed in the Bible. There men

learn their equality with their richest and that practical democracy can alone be most respected neighbour. It is there learned by our children and ourselves. Let us then cling to the Bible! It is our safeguard and our only safeguard.

book. I do not come here to talk about When I speak of the Bible, I mean this versions of the Bible. What did our an cestors, for a hundred and fifty years, know about versions? We talk of the Bibles which we and our fathers for two hundred years have read, in the faith of the doctrine in which they have lived Monsieur l'Institutor.-Many of the cures happily and died triumphantly. These

UNIVERSITY OF FRANCE. ACADEMY AT BORDEAUX.
The Inspector of the Schools of the Dordogne to the
Schoolmasters of the Department :

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

THE lands where Popery and the Inquisition flourished, Italy and Spain, though blessed with rare fertility, with mineral wealth, with unclouded skies, are now, of all the lands where the name of Christ has been mentioned so long, the most degraded and the most wretched. The countries where Popery has not been quite strong enough to establish or to maintain the Inquisition, but in which, nevertheless, she has substituted cunningly-devised fables and the commandments of men, for pure and undefiled religion, are countries sunk beneath a load of despotism, and debased even in this, the boasted nineteenth century, to a degree of ignorance and servility, hap pily unknown for many generations, to Protestant freemen. And in those darker lands, where Mohammedanism has deluded the population-in Turkey and Persia particularly freedom is unknown, the people perish through lack of knowledge, and God's ancient people are barbarously oppressed; while in China and all pagan nations, in the wilds of Africa, among the savage tribes of America, the hordes of Tartary, and the heathens of the distant isles, the weak are unprotect ed from the strong, lust and rapine reign supreme, the land is uncultivated, and generation follows generation to the grave, each sinking lower than its predecessor in misery, barbarism, and sin.

Nor let it be said that other peculiarities affecting these nations account for their disasters, otherwise than by the simple fart of the withdrawal of God's favour. The test has been applied to

The

different parts of the same countries, and every where the same tale is told. north and south of Ireland are the seats respectively of Protestantism and Popery, -in the former, the arts of industry and peace continually flourish; the latter are the favourite abodes of superstition and penury, of disaffection and crime. The Popish and Protestant cantons of Switzerland are similarly contrasted-so also are the Popish and Protestant parts of Prussia; and France, besides presenting the same distinction between several of her southern departments, can tell the tale that, with the faithful band of Protestants, whom she exiled by the perfidious revocation of the Edict of Nantes, fted the glory and the happiness of the nation. So, likewise, Holland and Belgium, respectively, prove that there is in national fidelity, in the acknowledgment of the one true God, who has promised,

them that honour me I will honour," a salient spring of strength and prosperity; and that there is in national apostasy, and particularly in the Popish form of it, the certain source of domestic distraction and incessant depression. The events that mark the history of these countries cannot otherwise be explained. If they can,

if, indeed, peculiar advantages of climate, position, or soil, are to be deemed the causes of prosperity-or if human skill and policy be considered its efficient promoters, how shall the difficulty be solved when the same climate, soil, and position, and the same form of government, have been enjoyed by the countries or parts of countries in which dif

ferent fruits have been gathered? And above all, how shall the very different influence of countries in colonization be explained, save by reference to the operation of the Christian or worldly principles that distinguish their governments, -the civilization and wisdom of the rulers being in all cases much the same? England, for instance, has carried, and is carrying even now, to many a colony, her sceptre of mercy and justice. In all, the Bible and indefatigable preachers of the pure Word of God, are scattered among an intelligent and improving po

pulation. But the blood-hound tracked the way of the Popish Spaniard across the southern continent of America; at Goa the mandate of Portuguese inquisitors summoned trembling heathens to bow to idols scarcely less debasing than their own; and France has carried to Lower Canada, and, in later times, to Algiers and the Pacific, a tyranny as merciless as that which, in her now liberated colony of St. Domingo roused thousands of enervated but maddened bondmen to seize and trample on their intolerable oppressors.

NEW PUBLICATIONS.

Rome's Policy towards the Bible, or Papal Ef forts to suppress the Scriptures, in the last five centuries, exposed: By an American Citizen. Philadelphia: James M. Campbell, 1844.

THE object of this publication, the second of a series of Tracts for the Times, is sufficiently explained in the title. It portrays the crafty policy of the papal power, exhibited toward all translations of the Scriptures into the living languages of Europe, and, by an appeal to authentic facts, proves that wherever Rome has had the power, from Wickliffe's day, in 1380, to the present time, the Bible has been a forbidden book, and those who have ventured to read it have opened it at the peril and sacrifice of their lives, while the sacred volume itself has invariably been BURNED, as a book too vile to be tolerated. The recent assaults upon the Bible in our city, are placed, by these historical facts, in a light in which they must be intelligible to

every one. It is a most seasonable publication, written with earnestness and ability, and should be in the possession of every Protestant.

A Voice from Rome, Answered by an American Citizen; or a Review of the Encyclical Letter of Pope Gregory XVI., A. D. 1842; The Bishop's Oath, and the Pope's Curse upon Heretics, &c. Philadelphia, 1844.

THE documents in this book scarcely needed a commentary. They are from the highest authority in the Roman church, and, more than any thing a Protestant could write, they condemn her. We are sure that little more is needed, than a knowledge of the papal doctrines and corruptions, to turn the tide back against Rome. More knowledge of this sort is contained in this pamphlet than in any other publication of its size with which we are acquainted.

« ZurückWeiter »