Loyola University Maryland - Evergreen / Green and Gray Yearbook (Baltimore, MD)

Page 32 text:

This, at kast, is in the power of all: every Catholic can send his individual protest, and every Catholic Society can send its collective protest against the bill to their Congressmen and Senators. Tell them that you are one of many who are opposed to the Prussianizing of our schools by Federalization, to needless additional taxation, and to the weakening or destruction of those mighty bulwarks of our country — the religious school. ‘‘©mil Ipr0lip0t?” O boast not to me of your wealth and your beauty — True riches are found in the service of duty; And the peace and contentment of acting aright Are worth all your riches, whatever their might. What are mansions and lands to the heart that’s untrue? Like leaves of the autumn that lone highways strew — Then away with the treasure that time will consume And seek ye the riches that know not the tomb. George R. Gibson, ’ 23 . 30

Page 31 text:

debt was a little more than a billion dollars. Since that time our debt has advanced with such rapidity that it is now around the appalling figure of twenty-six billion, twenty-six times our national debt of three years ago. The Smith Bill calls for an initial appropriation of one hundred million dollars, or an annual payment of almost one dollar for every man, woman and child in the United States. The provision would likewise require the States to appropriate amounts equivalent to their respective al lotments by the Government. Surely there is a sufficient burden of taxes to be carried by the people without adding thereto for the purpose of setting up an educational dictator in Washington. Opposition to this bill is also urged because it expressly discrimi- nates against all schools Avherein principles of Christianity are taught and inculcated. The press of our entire country is greatly excited over the spread of Bolshevism in our Public Schools. We should not be surprised at such facts as they are far from being new. For at least five years many poorly-educated teachers have been permitted to imbue the minds of tlieir pupils with Bolshevick doctrines thoroughly destructive of morality and otherwise injurious to the welfare of their respective communities. Yet, unconsciously, the Smith Bill tends to favor teachers of this stamp; for it practically excludes all schools which teach the pupils their duties to God and their fellow-man. The only schools Avhich can properly oppose Bolshevism, Socialism and any other anti-American principles are those in which the sound doctrines of morality are tauglit. They alone are able to protect the children and teach them those truths which will make them true and loyal Americans. The meaning of the Smith-Towner Bill is thus well put in an edi- torial of the Cincinnati Enquirer: “Under the guise of nationalizing the public-school system of the United States, efforts are being made to introduce, through a congressional enactment, precisely the system that Prussian autocrats utilized a half century ago. It is proposed to direct curricula and training of teachers from the banks of the Potomac and to place in the President’s Cabinet a Secretary of Public Instruction. “An end, and a sudden end should be put to these machinations. It is a cardinal principle that control of education should be kept cfosC to the people. . . . Federalization of education is a serpeant that ought first to be scotched and then slain.” Surely Catholics will not remain apathetic in face of this danger threatening religion and society. “If the Smith Bill ever becomes a Federal Statute,” says America (December 28. 1918), “the parochial school, humanly speaking, will be an impossibility.” 29

Page 33 text:

nwrnntpnt Olnntrnl of Eburatinn. Harry Casea ' , ’21. If anyone has conceived the idea that immediate protest against government control of education is not in order, let him read the pro- ceedings of the National Education Association, lately in convention at Cleveland. This very active association, as the St. Louis Post-Dispatch aptly remarks, “Will render ours the most obnoxious bm ' eaucratic government on earth.’’ In the passage by the Senate of the so-called “Americanization Bill,” the Association feels that the first difficult step has been taken. The right to educate is a moral power to impart to others those things which one is fit to impart licitly and usefully to the end of pre- serving and developing the body, perfecting the mind and evolving both the intellectual and moral powers of man. Representing the temporal order, the State, whether Pagan or Christian, has the right to look after the material wants and interests of society, not after men’s minds, ideas, intelligences, motives and consciences. The end of conjugal society is the education no less than the pro- creation of chikh ' en. Parents are called by God not only to generate children to bodily life, hut also to form their minds; therefore they are entitled to be the first instructors of their children, themselves, or through teachers of their own choosing. This right is universal and is not in any way altered because popular vote would have it otherwise. The State is vested with no authority to trample on the inalienable right of i arents to educate their own offspring as their conscience may dictate. No authority can absorb a power which had a prior existence, and which rests more immediately on nature. Hence Leo XHI tells us that the pai ' ental authority can neither be absorbed by the State nor abolished by it, for it has the same origin as human life itself. If the State, contrary to the wishes of the parents, takes into its own hands the education of youth, it commits a two-fold violation of right — ■ one natural, the other positive. “Lirst — A violation of the rights of parents; for to them and not to the State, God has confided the children to be educated; of them and not of the State, God will one day demand an account for the souls of the children.” 31