In the
same manner, an Episcopal teacher, in a private school formed and
supported by Episcopalians, may use and commend forms of prayer, and
explain the various usages of that church, exhibiting their excellence,
and their adaptation to the purposes for which they are intended. He may
properly do this, because, in the case supposed, the patrons of the
school are _united_ on this subject, and their _tacit consent_ may be
supposed to be given. But place the same teacher over a school of
Friends, whose parents dislike forms and ceremonies of every kind in
religion, and his duty would be changed altogether. So, if a Roman
Catholic is intrusted with the instruction of a common district school
in a community composed of many Protestant denominations, it would be
plainly his duty to avoid all influence, direct or indirect, over the
minds of his pupils, except in those religious sentiments and opinions
which are common to himself and all his employers. I repeat the
principle. _He is employed for a specific purpose, and he has no right
to wander from that purpose, except as far as he can go with the common
consent of his employers._
Now the common ground on religious subjects in this country is very
broad. There are, indeed, many principles which are, in my view,
essential parts of Christianity, which are subjects of active discussion
among us. But, setting these aside, there are other principles equally
essential, in regard to which the whole community are agreed; or, at
least, if there is a dissenting minority, it is so small that it is
hardly to be considered.
Pages:
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224