Ohio History Journal

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF OHIO

by BERNARD MANDEL

Fenn College, Cleveland, Ohio

Foremost in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution

was the guarantee that "Congress shall make no law respecting an

establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof."

This amendment, however, was not a conclusive establishment of re-

ligious freedom for three reasons. First, it was a statement of prin-

ciple which was accepted in theory but often circumscribed in

practice. Second, it was a principle with so many ramifications that

its precise interpretation was left to the determination of future

legislators, administrators, and courts. Third, it merely transferred

the struggle from the arena of the federal government to that of

the various states, for it had reference only to powers exercised by

the United States government and not by the states.

Consequently, the fight for complete religious liberty and the

separation of church and state has continued to the present day, as-

suming the form of separate, though related, struggles in the various

states. One of the institutions in which the concept has received a

major test has been the public school system. The following pages

are a history of the relationship between religion and public educa-

tion in Ohio, an investigation of the forces that determined the de-

velopment of this relationship, and an analysis of the various

issues involved in it.

Religion, Education, and the State, 1787-1850

In order to understand the principles and practices of Ohio with

regard to religion and education, it is necessary to investigate her

heritage from the mother colonies which populated the Northwest

Territory, from the Continental Congress which organized it, and

from the early settlers who established its first traditions and

institutions.

The Anglican Church was disestablished in the middle and

southern colonies during or immediately following the revolution,

185

• 1
 

186    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

but the separation of the Congregational Church in New England

was more protracted, being consummated in Connecticut in 1818 and

in Massachusetts in 1833. These two states, together with Virginia,

were the chief sources of early emigration to Ohio and were the

mother states of the men who most influenced the development of

the Ohio school system.¹ The charter of Connecticut proclaimed

"the onely and principall end of this Plantacon" to be "the knowl-

edge and obedience of the onely true God and Saviour of mankind

and the Christian faith."  Similarly, the Massachusetts Constitution

of 1780 affirmed that "the happiness of a people, and the good order

and preservation of civil government, essentially depend upon piety,

religion and morality; and these can not be generally diffused . . .

but by the institution of the public Worship of God, and of public

instruction in piety, religion and morality."

The Continental Congress also recognized the theory that

religion was fundamental to national existence. This policy was

expressed in the Northwest Ordinance in the following historic

words:

Article I. No person, demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly

manner, shall ever be molested on account of his mode of worship or re-

ligious sentiments in the said territory.

Article III. Religion, morality and knowledge, being necessary to good

government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of edu-

cation shall forever be encouraged.

In pursuance of this policy the Ohio Company established

schools for religious training. A fund for the support of religion

and education was raised by the first settlers, and in 1800 the

territorial assembly authorized the lease of the ministerial lands in

section twenty-nine of each township, three-fourths of the profit

therefrom to be used to support "such public teacher or teachers

of piety, religion and morality as shall be employed."

The founding fathers of Ohio were guided by these traditions

and influences when they wrote the first constitution in 1802.

Article VIII, Section 3, dealing with religion and education, de-

clared that, while religious freedom would be protected,

religion, morality, and knowledge being essentially necessary to good gov-

ernment and the happiness of mankind, schools, and the means of instruc-

1 W. Ross Dunn, "Education in Territorial Ohio," Ohio State Archaeological and

Historical Quarterly, XXXV (1926), 326-366.

• 2
 

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS               187

 

tion shall forever be encouraged by legislative provision not inconsistent

with the rights of conscience.

Adherence to these principles was pronounced during the en-

suing seventy years by many state officials and by practically all of

the state superintendents of education, who frequently went beyond

the language of the constitution in identifying religion as Christian-

ity. These principles soon received practical implementation. In

1804 the general assembly established Ohio University at Athens

for the "promotion of good education, virtue, religion, and moral-

ity." It was a non-denominational institution, although Bible classes,

religious instruction, and church attendance were compulsory. The

state also incorporated denominational seminaries, academies, and

high schools. Of 170 such schools incorporated between 1803 and

1850, twenty-one were more or less denominational in control or

sympathy.² Public funds were allotted for the support of parochial

schools as well as public schools until 1851. In 1837, for example,

the state school fund supported 2,175 private schools and 4,336

public schools.³ Furthermore, many localities made grants of

money for sectarian education.

It is evident from a survey of educational histories, journals,

and reports that a religious--almost a missionary--spirit inspired

the educators of Ohio during the first half of the nineteenth century.

Bible reading was extensive throughout this period, and in the early

part of the century it was probably universally practiced. The

custom of conducting daily devotional exercises at the opening of

school was also generally prevalent. These exercises usually con-

sisted of Bible reading, prayer, and the singing of hymns. In the

secondary schools regular courses in religion and morality were

generally offered for at least one term. In addition a religious

context was given to other subjects, especially reading, composition

writing, and science.

Probably the most important avenue through which religion

entered the minds of the pupils was the readers in common use. As

late as 1865 these books were composed of religious material to

 

2 Edward Alanson Miller "History of the Educational Legislation in Ohio from

1803 to 1850," Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly, XXVII (1919),

97-101 and Appendix A, 153-211.

3 First Annual Report of Superintendent of Common Schools Made to the Thirty-

Sixth General Assembly of the State of Ohio (Columbus, 1838), 46.

• 3
 

188    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

the extent of twenty-five to forty percent.⁴ From 1837 on the field

of school reading books was easily led by the famed series of six

McGuffey Readers. About twenty-five percent of the selections in

the first editions of these books was of a religious nature, and prac-

tically all of the remaining selections consisted of moral lessons

which were presented as inspired doctrines. Most of the other

readers in general use followed the same pattern, but most of them

were based on a narrower theology. They were all eclectic in form,

were animated by a strong religiosity, and tended to identify

Christianity with religion although they purported to be nonsec-

tarian.

The most important element in any educational system is the

teachers. Consequently, the standpoint of the teaching profession

is highly significant. The teachers not only adhered consistently

to the doctrines and practices described above, but generally took

an even stronger position in behalf of a thoroughly Christian sys-

tem of public schools. The Western Literary Institute and College

of Teachers, from 1835 to 1842, worked out the policy that the

Bible, as the revealed word of God, should be the authoritative

source of instruction in morality based on the Christian religion.

The institute believed that this could be done "in perfect consistency

with religious freedom, and without offence to the peculiar tenets

of any christian sect."⁵

The Ohio Teachers Association adopted, and continued the

propagation of, essentially the same ideas for the next fifty years.

Its philosophy was based on the theory that the primary right and

duty of any government is self-preservation, and consequently "the

state may and must furnish all the educational training necessary to

constitute good citizenship."6 Since "morality is the only inde-

structible basis of all free government,"⁷ it contended, the state, to

provide for its own perpetuity, must encourage the dissemination

of moral instruction through its public school system. Natural

virtue and social necessity were considered inadequate bases for

 

4 "Public Schools as a Moral Force," Ohio Educational Monthly, XL (1891), 423.

5 Western Literary Institute and College of Professional Teachers, Transactions

of the Seventh Annual Meeting Held in Cincinnati, October, 1837 (Cincinnati, 1838),

13.

6 Samuel Findley, "Religious Teaching in the Public Schools," Ohio Educational

Monthly, XLIV (1895), 227-232.

7 Ohio Journal of Education, II (1853), 276.

• 4
 

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS                 189

 

moral duty and action; therefore, "effective moral instruction must

be based upon and vitalized by religion.^"8 Corollary to this

hypothesis was the necessity of using the Bible in the schools since

it contained the "best code of moral instruction known to man."⁹

While frequent references were made to nonsectarianism, it is clear

that to the Ohio teachers this meant a theology which comprised

those tenets that were common to the various trinitarian Christian

sects.

Secularization of the Schools, 1851-1913

Following 1850 there ensued a protracted process of seculari-

zation of the public schools during which the principles and policies

described above were generally modified or eliminated. In the

Ohio Constitutional Convention of 1850 a conflict developed over the

wording of the articles concerning religion and education and was

finally resolved by a compromise. In final form, those sections

appeared as follows:

Article I. Section 7. . . . Religion, morality, and knowledge . . .

being essential to good government, it shall be the duty of the General

Assembly to pass suitable laws to protect every religious denomination in

the peaceable enjoyment of its own mode of public worship, and to en-

courage schools and the means of instruction.

Article VI. Section 2. The General Assembly shall make such pro-

visions, by taxation or otherwise, as, with the income arising from the school

trust fund, will secure a thorough and efficient system of common schools

throughout the State, but no religious or other sect or sects shall ever have

any exclusive right to, or control of, any part of the school funds of this

State.

The general school law of 1853 reaffirmed the provision that

school funds be applied "exclusively to the support of common

schools."

These enactments had three results. First, they ended the

practice of apportioning public funds to private schools, thus

placing the parochial schools entirely on their own resources.

Second, they seemed to weaken what had always been accepted as a

constitutional mandate for religious education, actually leaving the

problem to the future interpretation of school boards and the

courts. Third, by ending the possibility of a division of the school

8 Ohio Educational Monthly, XIX (1870), 257-258.

9 William Slocomb, "School Government," ibid., XVII (1868), 2.

• 5
 

190    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

funds between the various denominational groups, they caused the

Catholics to adjust their position from one of campaigning for

such a solution to one of opposing religious education in the public

schools. This was to be a major factor in the secularization of

education.

A more potent factor in bringing about a change was the de-

struction of the homogeneity of the small township and county

school districts which had earlier made religious education a matter

of community concurrence rather than sectarian domination. From

the opening of the Northwest Territory there came from the eastern

states "Jews, Catholics, Protestants and Agnostics," all of whom

"sought freedom to worship in the new country."¹⁰ During the same

period European immigrants flooded into the state, comprising

people of all faiths and people of no faith. Particularly significant

to the outcome of the issues dealt with here were the masses of Irish

Catholics and German liberals and skeptics. In addition the process

of urbanization contributed to the bringing together of people of

all creeds. Furthermore, the assemblage of such diverse elements in

the cities inevitably resulted in demands for a more liberal applica-

tion of religious liberty and the elimination of unacceptable doctrin-

airism from the schools. Urbanization also had the effect of reduc-

ing the religious fervor of a more agrarian populace as their interests

became dominated by the more material pursuits and activities of an

industrial civilization. This was augmented by the rise of the

scientific spirit, especially as influenced by Darwinism.

These factors came to fruition during the second half of the

nineteenth century. The most spectacular and significant contro-

versy on religion in the schools took place in Cincinnati. This

metropolis became the testing ground of the issue in Ohio because

the large Catholic, Jewish, and liberal elements among its popula-

tion were strong enough to force the issue.

The Bible was introduced into the Cincinnati schools around

1834 on a voluntary basis, and a few years later all pupils were

required to have fifteen minutes daily of Bible reading, the magic

formula "without note or comment" being added, supposedly to

 

10 Irene D. Cornwell, "Influences of Early Religious Literature in the Ohio Valley

from 1815 to 1850," Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Quarterly, XXV (1916),

205.

• 6
 

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS             191

 

prevent proselytizing by over-zealous teachers.  Upon objections

from the Catholic Church, pupils whose parents so desired were

absolved from this requirement, but neither the Catholics nor the

school board were satisfied. Consequently the board, persuaded

that it "might effect a happy termination of all past difficulties, and

a return of a large class of pupils," adopted another compromise

in 1852 making Bible reading compulsory, but allowing pupils to

use the version of their choice.11

The controversy lapsed until 1869, when it was suddenly and

dramatically revived by representations of certain Catholic author-

ities that an equitable solution to the problem could be found in a

consolidation of the public and parochial schools. The board agreed

to negotiate on a basis for consolidation, but the discussions were

doomed to failure, as the archbishop refused to relinquish the

principle that "Catholics can not approve of that system of educa-

tion for youth which is apart from instruction in the Catholic faith

and the teaching of the Church." In the meantime, S. A. Miller, a

Catholic member of the board, dropped a bombshell into the pro-

ceedings by introducing a motion to repeal the regulation of 1852

and to prohibit all religious instruction and Bible reading. After

several weeks of heated argument, the board passed Miller's reso-

lution, twenty-two to fifteen.12

The following day a group of citizens applied to the superior

court of Cincinnati for a restraining order against the board,

enjoining it from publishing or enforcing this resolution. A tempo-

rary injunction was granted and hearings for a permanent appli-

cation were set.

From the beginning of these events, a storm of controversy

burst forth throughout the state, characterized by lengthy newspaper

polemics, pamphleteering, public mass meetings, declarations by

every variety of organization, and fulminations from the pulpits.

Finally, the debate was climaxed by a week of argumentation by

the best legal and oratorical talent before the bench of the superior

court. In general, the advocates of religious education comprised

the Protestant clergy, virtually the entire press, and the bulk of the

 

11 Trustees and Visitors of the Common Schools of Cincinnati, Twenty-fourth

Annual Report (Cincinnati, 1853) 1-13.

12 Cincinnati Gazette, September 14, 1869; Cincinnati Commercial, September 21,

November 1, 1869.

• 7
 

192    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

teaching profession. The action of the board was supported by the

Catholics, Jews, non-believers of every variety, and liberals of all

persuasions.

The supporters of the status quo leaned heavily on tradition,

custom, and popular prejudice to sustain their case for the preser-

vation of Bible reading and religious instruction in the schools.¹³

Their strongest argument was based on the self-preservation theory

of education, which led to the conclusion that the state had the

paramount right to control the education of the children, and when

its rights or duties conflicted with the rights or wishes of the parents,

the latter must yield. But the safety of the state depended above

all on the inculcation of moral virtues, and it was contended that

there was no sound morality except that which was based on

religious principles as derived from the Bible. It followed from

this that "whatever the State can do without violating that right

(of conscience), it not only may do, but is bound to do-not for

the advantage or benefit of religion, but for its own safety and

welfare."

This position led to the question: what religion should the state

teach? It was proposed to teach a "universal religion," which

actually meant a so-called "nonsectarian" Christianity, thus ignor-

ing or dismissing the objections of Catholics, non-Christian

believers, and Nullifidians. To sustain the right of the state to

teach Christianity, reliance was placed on the thesis that Christian-

ity was a part of the common law of the state. Not only was re-

ligious instruction claimed to be authorized by these considerations,

but the plaintiffs, in their petition, maintained that it was required

by Article I of the Ohio Constitution. The plaintiffs even approp-

riated the sanction of Article VI, on the grounds that the exclusion

of religious instruction from the schools would give "exclusive

control" of the school fund to the atheists.

This position was defended against charges that it was in

violation of the rights of conscience and religious liberty of all but

Protestant Christians by invoking the precedent of a similar case

in Maine, in which the supreme court held that "a law is not un-

 

13 The Bible in the Public Schools. Arguments in the Case of John D. Minor

et al. versus The Board of Education of the City of Cincinnati et al. The Superior

Court of Cincinnati, With the Opinions and Decisions of the Court (Cincinnati, 1870).

• 8
 

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS            193

 

constitutional, because it may prohibit what one conscientiously

thinks right, or require what he may conscientiously think wrong."14

The secularist movement was constantly impugned as "an open,

public act of aggression upon the Bible," "a distinct blow at the

most precious and vital element of our civilization, a gratuitous

assault upon the inspired source of all religion and morality," "a

denunciation of Christianity," and the beginning of an anti-religious

crusade that would end by tearing down the churches. Even people

who did not believe that religious instruction was of much value

insisted upon its retention as "a public recognition of the Bible as

the Word of God, and an appeal to the reverence of the child in its

behalf."

Finally, the exclusion of religious instruction was dismissed

as a spurious attempt to overthrow the public school system. The

entire movement was considered a cunning plot to "crush out all

religious instruction" with the result that "righteous men of all

sects and creeds will then unite to tear down such a system."

Whereas the advocates of religious education relied mainly on

the traditions of custom and common law, the secularists based

their case largely on the principles of religious liberty and freedom

of conscience. They held that the Bible is a sectarian book written

in various sectarian versions, that a judicious selection of passages

could be prejudicial to the beliefs of any sect, that Bible reading

without comment is an essentially Protestant practice, and that there

is no "elemental religious truth" upon which all sects can agree.

Consequently, the practices of the schools in the past violated the

rights of a large proportion of the people, who objected not only

to having their children taught a religion they did not believe in,

but even to being taxed to support the teaching of such religion to

those who did believe in it.

Protection of these rights was found in the constitution of

Ohio. Liberty of conscience meant that religion was the exclusive

concern of each individual, with which the state had no right to

interfere, but a virtual union of church and state had been effected

by the compulsion to attend schools in which religious exercises

were conducted. The function of the state was to protect, not

 

¹⁴ Donahoe v. Richards, 38 Me. 379.

• 9
 

194    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

religion or any brand of religion, but religious liberty for all,

including minorities, who were the only ones in need of such

protection.

The allegation that Christianity had any special rights before

the law was rebutted vigorously and challenged by both federal

and state supreme court decisions.15 The school board was con-

cerned with the maintenance of a public school system which would

be, in accordance with the Act of 1853, "equally free and accessible

to all white children." The board claimed that the reading of the

Bible "has had the necessary effect to prevent the attendance of

large numbers of children," and that the exclusion of the Bible

was expected to make the schools palatable to all and thus bring

them back into the system.

It was becoming increasingly evident that the public schools

could not practically or expediently take upon themselves any in-

struction in religion, and that such practices were not only malev-

olent in their effect upon the schools, but were equally injurious

to society, for they inevitably resulted in the fostering of sectarian

animosities and prejudices among the people. Finally, the board

of education denied the jurisdiction of the court in the matter,

claiming that interference by the court would be a usurpation of

the discretionary powers granted to the board by the legislature. The

general assembly had fulfilled its constitutional requirement to

"pass suitable laws," being itself the sole judge of what was suitable,

and those laws had "confided in the Board of Education absolute

and unrestricted and unlimited discretion over the whole curriculum

of school exercises and school education."

On February 15, 1870, the superior court of Cincinnati rendered

its decision. Judge Hagans observed a distinction "between those

provisions of the [Ohio] Constitution which assure the protection

of the man, and those which are purely designed for the security

of the state." This contradiction, he held, must be resolved in

favor of the state, at least "for this world"--the conscience may

triumph in the next. For the state had declared religious instruc-

tion essential to good government.

Pulpit and press throughout the state resounded with exulta-

 

15 Wheaton v. Peters, 8 Peters 591; Bloom v. Richards, 2 O. S. 387.

• 10
 

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS              195

 

tion that "the Bible is saved."  But the rejoicing was premature.

The decision was appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court, and in

December 1872, after two and a half years of continued agitation,

the judgment of the lower court was reversed and the exclusion of

religious education upheld. Judge Welch held that "the legislature

having placed the management of the public schools under the

exclusive control of the directors, trustees, and board of education,

the courts have no rightful authority to interfere by directing what

instruction shall be given, or what books shall be read therein."

Judicial interference could be allowed only if the board committed

a violation of the state constitution, but the constitution did not

"enjoin or require religious instruction, or the reading of religious

books, in the public schools of the state."16

This decision was not a clear-cut victory for secularism, for,

while the board was sustained, religious education was still per-

mitted at the discretion of the local school boards. However, during

a period in which religious education was still prevalent in Ohio,

the ruling actually had the effect of removing the alleged constitu-

tional sanctions for such instruction and authorizing a change in

the status quo, thus operating indirectly to favor the secularization

that was in process.

The story of the secularization of the schools in Cincinnati

was reenacted in many other cities. In most cases, however, the

secularization of the schools was not so dramatic. It was a gradual

process, accompanied by little fanfare. The custom in most districts

was to permit the teachers to do as they pleased in the matter, and

as the influence of the new ideas penetrated the ranks of the teachers,

the daily Bible-reading was dropped in one school after another.

Even as early as 1870, the state commissioner of common schools

reported that there was "very little" Bible teaching in Ohio.¹⁷ In

1873 the president of the Ohio Teachers Association stated that

"the secularization of our public schools is all but accomplished.

The acts of worship are omitted, or are very meagre. The schools

are generally conducted in such a way that no religion is taught in

 

16 Board of Education of the City of Cincinnati v. John D. Minor et al., 23 O. S.

211.

17 James Fraser, "Religion in American Schools," Ohio Educational Monthly,

XIX (1870), 109-110.

• 11
 

196     OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

them."¹⁸ By 1900 few schools offered courses in religion or morality,

and there had been a decisive change in the character of the reading

books. Whereas in 1865 twenty-five to forty percent of the readers

consisted of religious matter, by 1891 the religious content was only

two to four percent.¹⁹

However, the secularization of the schools throughout the state

was not universal and developed unevenly. Particularly persistent

was the custom of conducting opening exercises of five to fifteen

minutes, consisting of scriptural readings, prayers, and hymns. In

many schools the practice has continued to the present day. Here

and there, a reversal of the general trend gained the ascendancy.

In the Ohio Teachers Association, advocacy of religious

training died hard, but eventually even the teachers were swept into

the current of the secularist movement. The position that the

teachers had finally reached by 1886 was summarized by the presi-

dent of the association:

How the great natural laws of morality and of conduct . . . can be

based on the Bible itself, and be vitalized and vivified in public school

work by a sense of religious obligation, is a question difficult of solution....

With an unanimous judgment as to the necessity of such instruction in

the work of education, there was such divergence of opinion as to its prac-

ticability in schools supported by the state, that I conclude that the matter

must rest at present where Dr. Harris puts it, viz: "That it is for the teachers

not to claim to introduce formal religious ceremonies, but to make all their

teaching glow with a general faith, hope, and charity."

This seemed to be the final judgment, for the question of religious

instruction was rarely discussed by either the association or its

journal after 1886.

The position of the state commissioners of common schools also

underwent modification during this period. While belief in religious

education was retained, it was felt that this was the job of the

church and home and not within the domain of the public schools.

After 1875 the state education authorities accepted the state of

affairs and lost interest in agitating for religious instruction.

Thus, for sixty years the current of secularization flowed for-

ward, in spite of certain stagnant backwaters, divergent streams,

18 U. T. Curran, "Inaugural Addrets," Ohio Educational Monthly, XXII (1873),

326.

19 Ohio Educational Monthly, XL (1891), 423.

30 W. W. Ross, "Inaugural Address," ibid., XXXV (1886), 377-378.

• 12
 

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS              197

 

and retrogressive eddies. But following 1913 there were significant

and successful efforts to stop the progress and reverse the course of

the movement.

Revival of the Religious Education Movement,

1913-1947

Since 1913 there has been an unmistakable trend throughout the

United States to bring religion back into the public schools or at

least to establish a religious education program which would be

intimately connected with the school system. This movement has

necessarily assumed forms quite different from those which pre-

vailed before 1850, but basically they share one feature-they

involved a weakening of the concept of strict separation of church

and state.

One manifestation of this trend may be seen in the fact that

from 1913 to 1941 the number of states which required Bible

reading in the schools rose from two to twelve.²1 During this

period, also, the supreme court of the United States rendered two

decisions which decidedly weakened the doctrine of separation of

church and state. In these cases it was held that public school funds

could be applied to the purchase of textbooks for parochial school

pupils²² and to defray the cost of transporting children to parochial

schools.²³ These and similar practices have been inaugurated in a

growing number states.

But the most important and widespread form in which the new

religious education movement appeared was the week-day church

school idea. The plan, in its modern form, was originated in Gary,

Indiana, in 1913 and soon spread throughout the country. The

principle of released time for religious instruction was not unknown

to Ohio. As early as 1862 Cincinnati had allowed pupils to be

excused one-half day each week for this purpose, and the school

board anticipated the modern church-school system by stating that

"an arrangement may be effected, if sufficient numbers encourage it,

that at the hours so allowed children of different denominations of

religion might receive the instruction of the clergy in the school-

 

21 Mary Dabney Davis, "Weekday Classes in Religious Education," United

States Office of Education, Bulletin, 1941, No. 3, p. 10.

22 Cochran v. Board of Education of Louisiana, 281 U. S. 370.

23 Everson v. Board of Education of Ewing Tp. et al., 330 U. S. 1.

• 13
 

198    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

rooms temporarily set apart to them."²4 Columbus permitted ab.

sence for religious instruction in 1872, and Dayton passed a similar

regulation in 1874. In 1916 Toledo adopted the week-day church-

school plan, and thereafter the movement spread rapidly through-

out the state.  By 1922 sixty-one schools had the plan in

operation, which was more than in any other state in the country.

Three years later Ohio was leading the nation in both number of

schools and total enrollment in the church-school plan. Although

it yielded its ranking position to New York State in 1933, it had

registered an absolute gain, in spite of the closures forced by the

depression, and by 1941 twenty-three school systems were partic-

ipating in the plan. The movement has continued to expand since

then. In 1947 ten of the twenty cities reporting had church schools

in operation and six of the eight counties reported that from one

to all of their districts were releasing pupils. The following descrip-

tions of the operation of the plan in several Ohio cities will illus-

trate the salient features of the week-day church school.

In the early twenties several individual churches in Dayton

established week-day schools, but the attempts were unsatisfactory.

The Dayton Council of Churches then requested that the board of

education cooperate in the program. The board agreed, with certain

stipulations. The program was inaugurated in 1922, and by 1929 all

schools in the city were participating, with an enrollment of 6,500

pupils.

Toledo organized the largest system of week-day religious in-

struction with interdenominational church schools. From 1916 to

1929 its enrollment grew from 2,531 to over 6,000, all in the

elementary grades. Van Wert also developed a successful pro-

gram based on the community, or interdenominational, plan

which was the plan followed in most cities in Ohio. It was started

in 1918 by the ministerial association, consisting of ministers of ten

Protestant churches, with the cooperation of the school board.

Three of the four church schools operated met in classrooms fur-

nished by the public schools. Children were excused for two periods

a week for classes which consisted of devotional services, Bible

drills, and religious expression in the form of drawing. Enrollment

 

24 Common Schools of Cincinnati, Thirty-third Annual Report (Cincinnati, 1862),

13.

• 14
 

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS             199

 

rose steadily from eighty-one percent of the pupils in the first six

grades in 1918, to ninety-six percent in 1924.

The majority of cities with week-day church schools inaug-

urated their programs between 1916 and 1922. Although the

depression undoubtedly accounted for the deceleration to a large

extent, it was not the only factor, for only nine of the thirty-four

church-school systems for which information is available were estab-

lished after 1925. Other reasons, not only for the slowing down of

the movement but also for the discontinuation of the schools in

some cities, were undoubtedly difficulties of administration, public

opposition, and "lack of interest." The program was confined al-

most exclusively to the elementary grades, and where the plan was

in operation it was generally quite successful from the point of

view of pupil participation, which ranged in most cases from eighty-

eight to one hundred percent.

The revival of the religious education movement also asserted

itself in an attempt to restore the Bible to its former place of honor

in the schools. As early as 1903 a speaker at the annual meeting

of the Ohio Teachers Association declared that the Bible must be

brought back, if not as a book of religion, then as a book of morals

or literature.²⁵  It was not long before this faint plea become a

resounding battle-cry in the chambers of the legislature.

In 1923 a bill was introduced into the Ohio House of Repre-

sentatives providing for compulsory Bible reading in the public

schools. Although the Buchanan Bill was favorably reported by

the committee on schools, no further action was taken during that

session. The chairman of the committee requested a decision by

the attorney general on the constitutionality of the bill. The attor-

ney general stated that religious principles "may be properly

taught in our public schools as a part of the secular knowledge

which is their province to instill into the youthful mind," that the

Bible was not sectarian, that the reading of the Bible in the public

schools was not in violation of any constitutional rights, and that

no pupil could evade the requirement to read the Bible on grounds

of conscientious beliefs.²⁶

 

25 A. T. Perry, "Are the Public Schools Failing in Ethical Training," Ohio Edu-

cational Monthly, LII (1903), 335-339.

26 Opinions of the Attorney General of Ohio, 1923, I, 83-86.

• 15
 

200     OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

On the second day of the 86th session of the general assembly

in 1925, the bill was introduced again. As amended, it required

that the Bible be read, "without sectarian comment, at the opening

of every public school on every school day," except in schools con-

ducting week-day religious instruction, and required all pupils

above the fourth year to learn the Ten Commandments.²⁷

On February 17 the bill passed the house by a vote of eighty

to forty, and two months later the senate concurred. However, on

April 30 the bill was vetoed by Governor Vic Donahey, who ex-

pressed his disapproval as follows:

The spirit of our federal and state Constitutions from the beginning

have [has] been to leave religious instruction to the discretion of parents. . . .

Boards of education in their discretion may require the reading of the Holy

Bible in the schools. In other words, we now have home rule in this respect

and there is no necessity for this bill establishing state dictation in the mat-

ter of religion.²⁸

As in 1872 the attempt to make Bible reading in the public

schools compulsory was defeated, but then it was the decisive

victory of the growing secularist movement whereas in 1924 secu-

larism found itself on the defensive and escaped defeat by a narrow

margin. Another significant development was the shift of forces

that took place during the half century between the two campaigns.

Whereas in 1872 the press had been virtually unanimous in opposing

the Cincinnati school board, in 1924 the press was predominantly

hostile toward the Buchanan Bill. For example, the Cleveland

Plain Dealer called it "a measure conceived in racial and religious

intolerance, born of the fancied superiority of one human strain

over another, and foisted as a relic of medievalism on a twentieth

century community. Its capacity for harm is beyond computation."²⁹

The teaching profession and public school officials had also

transformed their attitude from one of vehement support of Bible

reading to one of pragmatic skepticism, as expressed by R. G. Jones,

superintendent of schools in Cleveland, who stated the bill could

not be carried through to the satisfaction of anybody:

It would be almost impossible to teach religion in the schools by reading

the Bible, even without interpretation or comment, and convince the parents

27 House Journal, 86th Ohio General Assembly, 1 sess., CXI (1925), 47.

28 "James K. Mercer, ed., Ohio Legislative History, 1925-1926 (Columbus, n. d.),

67-69.

29 Cleveland Plain Dealer, April 19, 1925.

• 16
 

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS               201

 

of all pupils of all denominations that it was being done without denomi-

national bias.

I rather doubt, too, whether representatives of the different creeds

could reach an agreement on just which passages of the Bible should be

read. Perhaps the way out will be an adaptation of the Gary plan.30

Even important sections of the Protestant community opposed the

measure. Rev. Dilworth Lupton, pastor of the First Unitarian

Church, Cleveland, denounced it in the Cleveland Unitarian as

"religious fanaticism."³1

In spite of this opposition and of the failure of the Buchanan

Bill to become law, Bible reading won a new position in the schools

through local regulations or the action of individual teachers. In

1930 Bible reading was prohibited in several of the large cities, and

only a few required it, but in all the rest it was permitted at the

option of the teachers. By 1939 one investigator estimated that

eighty-five percent of the public school pupils in Ohio were reading

the Bible in school.³² In 1947 twenty-one of twenty-eight cities and

counties reporting had Bible reading or prayers, usually both, in

at least some of their schools, and in most cases it was a general

practice in those districts. In about one-third of those schools daily

devotional exercises were conducted; in another third weekly serv-

ices were held; and in the remaining third services were confined

to "occasional" or "frequent" chapel and assembly programs. Just

as many junior and senior high schools observed the practice as

elementary schools, which indicated a new trend in that respect. In

five districts ministers were invited to address the students at regular

programs.

Early in the depression another issue came to the fore, and

while this, too, produced no positive results, it was nevertheless of

great import, for it revealed that the concept of separation of church

and state had been so greatly weakened that a strong assault against

it could be repulsed only by a series of narrowly won skirmishes in

a struggle lasting four years. We refer to the campaign of the

Catholic Church to get public school funds from the state.

In the early part of 1933 the church announced that, due to

the difficult financial situation of the parochial schools, it would have

30 Ibid., February 14, 1925.

31 Ibid.

32 Alvin W. Johnson, "Bible Reading in the Public Schools," Education, LIX

(1938-39), 274-280.

• 17
 

202    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

to receive assistance or be compelled to close its schools. The

public school authorities and municipal officials did not welcome

such a possibility, as the schools were already heavily overcrowded

and they were also pinched economically. It was estimated that it

would cost the state over seventeen million dollars in new buildings

and other expenses to absorb the Catholic children into the public

school system. These conditions created a great deal of support

for the proposals which would not have been forthcoming under

more ordinary circumstances.

In June 1933 a bill was introduced into the Ohio legislature

granting a two-year subsidy of four million dollars to the Catholic

schools. The attorney general declared that such a measure was

unconstitutional: "No authority exists in law for the diversion or

use of the school funds of the state for the promotion or mainte-

nance of private schools or for any purpose other than the estab-

lishment and maintenance of common or public schools."³³ In spite

of this obvious fact, the bill won a majority of votes in the house

of representatives, but did not get the two-thirds necessary for

passage. Similar proposals were voted on at least eight times from

1933 to 1937. Twice bills failed of passage by only one vote; one

was passed by the senate but was defeated in the house; and in the

final contest the senate vetoed favorable action by the house.

From 1935 on the bills included a two-million-dollar approp-

riation for all denominational colleges in an effort to win the

support of the Protestants, but they remained adamant in their

virtually unanimous opposition, including at least ten of the Protes-

tant colleges which would have been the beneficiaries of the grant.34

Chief support of the measures came from the Catholics, of course,

and government officials who feared the consequences of having

additional burdens placed on the public schools. Governor Martin

L. Davey and the Cleveland City Council both urged passage of the

bill in 1935.

Attempts were also made to solve the problems of the parochial

schools by local agreements. For example, the Bishop of Toledo

made the following proposition to the school board of Tiffin:

1. The church would rent its parish school buildings to the board

33 Opinions of the Attorney General of Ohio, 1933, p. 1290.

34 Christian Century, LII (1935), 358, 491.

• 18
 

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS             203

 

of education for one dollar a year; 2. The church would main-

tain them, but the board would furnish light, heat, and janitor serv-

ice and pay the salaries of the sixteen teachers; 3. The church

would furnish six additional teachers; 4. The board would assume

jurisdiction of the schools, with the provisos that the teachers were

to consist of Ursuline Sisters, and that the enrollment of students

would not be disturbed, i. e., only parish children would attend.

These negotiations were not consummated, however, for the

attorney general expressed it as his opinion that, while the board

of education could rent rooms or buildings from the church and

employ teachers of any or no faith, it had no authority to agree, as

a condition of such lease, that certain teachers would be employed

or that certain pupils would be assigned to those schools. Further-

more, the children in those schools could not be placed under any

sectarian influence and the state superintendent could forbid the

wearing of any religious garb by the teachers.35

We have traced the course of the offensive against secular

education and the separation of church and state in Ohio schools,

and have seen that, although two attacks were repulsed, the gradual

increase of Bible reading and prayer and the rise of the week-day

church school, together with judicial authority to provide aid to

private denominational schools, have marked a new period in the

history of education in Ohio. It remains for us now to analyze

the cause of this revival and to explain the reanimation of forces

and concepts which seemed, a generation ago, to have largely passed

from American institutions.

The idea of the week-day church school was seized as an ideal

instrument for the restoration of religion in the public schools, for

this institution had three qualities that admirably suited it to the

aims of the churches under the conditions prevailing in the United

States in the twentieth century: first, it was inherently capable of

almost unlimited expansion without apparently conflicting with

either the laws, constitutional provisions, or popular sentiment with

regard to protection of religious liberty; second, it was a plan

which all religious groups could accept--the former antagonism

between Protestants on the one hand and Catholics and Jews on the

 

35 Opinions of the Attorney General of Ohio, 1933, pp. 1712-1718.

• 19
 

204    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

other was largely resolved by this compromise; third, many public

school officials viewed this program as a solution which would

absolve them of both responsibility and effort.

It must be noted that the antisecularist movement was not a

mere repetition of that of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

Popular accepance of religious liberty had been greatly liberalized

and strengthened since 1850, and any tendency to undermine it

was viewed critically. Practically the only reason put forward today

for religious education is the welfare of the individual child, rather

than the interests of the state. Many religious and educational

leaders feel that it is the duty of the schools to protect the children

against materialistic and scientific teaching, which, since World

War I, they have identified with bolshevism and the "undermining

of the very foundations of religion and society."³6 Also religious

instruction is offered as a supplementary branch of learning, few

protagonists claiming for it the pervasive position it occupied a

hundred years ago.

Finally, while religious education has made positive advances

since World War I, it is far from the position it held before the

Civil War. Probably less than one-tenth of the public school pupils

in Ohio attend week-day church schools, although a large percentage

have Bible reading or other types of religious exercises. Even for

these children the rest of the daily and weekly schedule is completely

secularized.

Conclusions

The relation between religion and education in Ohio has been

governed by two fundamental principles:   (1) religious liberty

and separation of church and state, and (2) district autonomy in

the determination of whether, how much, and what kind of religious

instruction shall be given in the schools. Nevertheless, these two

principles have been subject to widely varying interpretations, and

under their authority equally varied practices have been followed.

We must search further than merely the constitutional and legal

principles which underlie our educational system for the factors

which have determined actual practices.  Operating within the

framework of religious liberty and district autonomy there are four

 

36 0. T. Corson, "Protecting Our Schools Against Materialistic Teaching," Ohio

Educational Monthly, LXXII (1923), 39-46.

• 20
 

RELIGION AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS             205

 

factors that have determined the actual relationship between religion

and education in Ohio.

1. Popular conceptions of the meaning and application of

religious freedom. If by this is meant freedom for the state to

propagate religion, or Christianity, as it generally did until the

middle of the nineteenth century, the schools obviously would be

operated with different methods and objectives than if it meant

complete neutrality of the state in all matters of religion.

2. The composition of the population in the state, and partic-

ularly in the localities. It is an inescapable conclusion that one of

the chief causes of the secularization of the schools has been the

sheer impossibility of any other system where people of many dif-

ferent creeds lived together.

3. The strength of religious thought. It is evident that, as

religion enters more deeply into the minds of more people, the

desire to include it as an integral part of public education will

become more pronounced, and conversely, as it comprises a less

dominant part of their thinking, its inculcation by the public schools,

especially in violation of the rights of other groups, will appear to

be of less moment.

4. The strength of religious groups. Not only the thinking

of the people, but also the strength of the churches is an important

determining factor. Not the least element in the strength of religious

groups is their ability to unite in support of a particular program,

as they did in the case of the week-day church-school plan.

Until 1850 all of these factors operated to strengthen religious

domination of the schools. Religion played an important part in

the life and thinking of the people, who were predominantly

Protestant, and the implications of church and state separation had

been developed to a very limited degree. In the following fifty

years conditions were altered so that all of these factors tended to

operate in behalf of a secular school system. There was a marked

liberalization in the public attitude towards religious freedom, as

well as other democratic principles, such as suffrage, and economic

and social rights. There was a decided decline in the religious

fervor that had pervaded earlier generations and a simultaneous

ascendancy of other interests, particularly scientific. The growth

• 21
 

206    OHIO ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL QUARTERLY

 

of cities and immigration created populations consisting of all

religious faiths, and there was a sharp division among religious

groups on the problem of religion and education.

During the twentieth century there was a tendency towards

religious revival, and at the same time the major churches found a

common meeting ground in the advocacy of week-day church schools.

But the other two factors remained substantially unchanged, so that

the forces tending toward the secularization of education were

weakened, but not eliminated.

It may be said in conclusion that the legal, constitutional, and

administrative principles underlying the public school system of

Ohio will probably remain substantially unaltered for some time to

come. These principles are the established foundation of the school

system. However, wide variations in practice are possible with-

out disturbing that foundation. Whether the recent trends toward

more religious education and public support to denominational

schools is accelerated, or whether they are reversed and the schools

are completely secularized, will depend on the modification of the

relative strengths of the four determining factors discussed above.

• 22