Regional Synod of Canada - Reformed Church in America

Pioneer Christian Monthly

Date - Mar/73

Contributor - J. Moerman

Title - The Myth of the Neutral Public School

Topic - Education

Recently I have been involved with a Report to the Alberta Minister of Education. Pioneer asked me to put down a few of these thoughts for the benefit of our readers.

It has been widely acclaimed in the past and just as determinitely today, that our Public School system must remain neutral in its philosophy / religion / curriculum / belief. Purposively, I hitch these words together, for this is what the claim consciously or unconsciously is to include.

I would like to ask, who believes this myth? Who is trying to mislead or fool who? It is obvious to anyone who knows a little bit about textbooks, teachers, and Department of Education that the Public School Curriculum has never been neutral. Textbooks are written by people who hold a certain philosophy of life, which is bound to shine through in the materials presented and studied. We do not hold this against the writers, for indeed it cannot be otherwise.

In certain subjects this stands out clearer than in other subjects. We only have to mention textbooks on the theory of evolution. Quoting from Early Man, F. Clark Howell, everyone can read the following:

"The story of creation, as told in the Bible, is a fine case in point. It is seldom taken literal now. Its simple sweeping concepts are interpreted by most modern Christians and Jews as being symbolic of the spirit and majesty of God. The world in effect, was not created in six days even though the Bible says it was, and this discrepancy no longer troubles most devout people. Still old ideas die hard, there are men and women in the United States (marvelous Canadian school textbooks!) today who believe that the earth it flat. How else, they argue, can angels preside over its four corners as the Bible says."

Foundation of Biology, McElroy, "All living organisms have arisen from common ancestors by a gradual process of change that leads to diversification."

This is only a small sample of the neutrality" just in the field of creation. Why not acknowledge that the theory of evolution is a kind of belief, doctrine and religion to numerous people, including many scientists; just as much as the creation account is a belief, doctrine, and religion to numerous other people. Henry Adams was right when he said, "A teacher effects eternity. A teacher can never tell where his influence stops."

The Christian community believes that the Department of Education should either discontinue teaching inorganic evolution, or place alongside this hypothesis ' the teaching of the biblical creation-account. In our highly pluralistic society this would be a step in the direction toward justice for the Christian community.

Here are a few books which could be used in Public Schools alongside those used exclusively now.

Biology: A Search for Order in Complexity, $7.95 (High School Textbook).

Investigating God's Orderly World, $6.95 (Junior High Textbook).

Genes, Genesis, and Evolution, $9.95 (College or Adult).

Journey Away From God, $4.95 (Analysis of the conflict between scripture and so-called scientific evolution).

All these and many, many more are available from "Bible Science Association", P.O. Box 4006, Vancouver 9, B.C. To show how "neutral" our Public Schools are let me encourage you to get some of these books taught in the school alongside the theory of evolution! Or even seek to have your school librarian purchase them for browsing by students interested in the subject. Even here you will immediately run in stiff opposition. Are Public Schools neutral? Nonsense! No more than you or I are neutral.

Peter Hunt, a freelance writer wrote recently an article entitled, "Down with evolutionism". Among other here are a few things he wrote: "Man may have evolved physically from lower forms of life. It should also be noted, however, that the evidence even for this is by no means conclusive, and the theory is not capable of "scientific" proof because one cannot experiment with evolution over the vast periods of time required for demonstration. Indeed, the hypothesis of evolution of even all animal species from earlier species and life forms is not substantiated fully by the evidence from palaeontology, and there is a grave logical difficulty in assuming that the correlated organism known as a species could be developed out of prior species. The notion that evolutionary theory is anything but "theory" is typical of the crass and superstitious faith which the modern mind has in "science".

Secondly, even if man's body did evolve from those of lower animals there is still the question of his soul to be considered. If man has no immortal soul there is no problem. If he has, then it is impossible to say that his soul evolved. Intellect and will cannot evolve. The nature of man's rational life is such that it could not arise from the merely physical and biological; it had to be created. The power to conceive ideas is not something which simply evolves from matter, for it is a non-material principle in man. Ideas have no dimensions; they indicate a spiritual nature in man. It is possible that God permitted man's body to evolve and then created his soul. In other words, God created man at a certain point in His own image and likeness. This means that He transformed this creature which had evolved into a new and higher being. But, I repeat, the psyche of man could not evolve. And, furthermore, nothing could have come into existence without an intelligent and loving cause.

To teach evolution (and evolutionism, a thorough going creed of adaption) without raising all the questions involved is to shut young minds to the sources of truth. A scientific approach is a fuller one, open to differing interpretations."

Soon thereafter Doug Walker, one of the local writers sought to combat the above mentioned position by writing an article entitled, "Giving equal time on evolution". He begins his attack by stating, "Exposing children to a religious as well as scientific interpretation of the origin of species may sound like a fair proposition. It would only be fair however, if the differing views of religious people were considered and this might not be something that the most recent advocates of equal time would relish."

After having read his entire article I find that he is very limited on scholarly research but unlimited in old fashion unbelief and prejudice. I for one still say that if the Department of Education gives the Christian community the go-ahead sign to place certain scientifically approved textbooks setting forth the creationist point of life's origin, the highly prejudiced unbeliever may get the surprise of his life. There may be far more agreement on the origin of life than the sceptics like to see. One wonders why the agnostics are so deadly opposed to have children exposed to another view of life?

Christian parents cannot expect, nor do they expect, that the local Public School is to become a replica of the Christian home and church. However, it is quite something else, indeed grossly unfair and unjust, to have Christian children against the parents wish confronted and indoctrinated with a philosophy of life that is alien and opposed to what the Christian home and church is teaching.

If it was not such a serious subject, the claim that the Public School must be neutral would be an hilarious joke. I believe that the time is long past allowing the Department of Education to further nibble away an the convictions of the Christian community.

Please click the "Back" button of your browser to return to previous page.