Letter: Legal counsel for Bible curriculum sets the record straight
The following is a letter from A. Eric Johnston, attorney for the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, to Bob Barber, member of the committee proposing The Bible in History and Literature elective curriculum. Barber requested the letter to provide clarification on the proposed Bible curriculum for Vinton County High School.
Dear Mr. Barber:
I represent the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools (“NCBCPS”), the publisher of the Bible curriculum texbook, The Bible in History and Literature. I am writing to you as a member of the Bible Curriculum in VCHS Committee, which is considering whether the Bible be taught as an elective at Vinton County High School.
I understand there may be some concern that our curriculum is the subject of a lawsuit. I want to clarify that for you, so that you will not have any reservations about considering this worthy textbook.
It is not uncommon for there to be rumors and even representations that our textbook is and has been or is the subject of constitutional litigation. We are particularly sensitive to this, because we understand the constitutional establishment clause concerns that public school boards have when considering teaching religious related subjects, such as the Bible.
The United States Supreme Court has on more than one occasion stated that it is permissible to teach the Bible as a secular subject. See School District of Abington Township v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963) and Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980). Beginning in the 1960s, there have been a number of cases dealing with what type of religious activities are permitted in public schools. Even at the early date of 1963, the U.S. Supreme Court wanted to be clear that the Bible could be taught in a secular context for its history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion, art, and the like. Within this context, the NCBCPS developed The Bible in History and Literature as an appropriate textbook.
However, there have been vicious unsupported statements that our textbook has been and is the subject of constitutional litigation. The first case that is usually mentioned is Moreno, et al. v. Ector County Independent School District, No. M0-07-CV-39 (W.D. of TX, 2008). The initial complaint in the lawsuit alleged problems related to The Bible in History and Literature. However, NCBCPS was not a party to the litigation and there was no finding the texbook was improper in any manner. The lawsuit was a legal challenge concerning the practices of teachers in the district. It was alleged that school teachers were proselytizing and teaching improperly using the curriculum. The lawsuit was an “as applied” challenge, meaning that there was nothing wrong with the textbook or the curriculum it presents, but that it was being improperly used. Because the teachers were acting improperly did not make the textbook improper. The lawsuit was resolved on grounds unrelated to the textbook and was dismissed on April 2, 2008.
The other lawsuit is Gibson v. Lee County, Florida, Case No. 97-529-CIV-FTM-170 (M.D. FL, 1998); decided and reported on other grounds 1 F. Supp. 2d 1426 (M.D. FL, 1998). This lawsuit involved teaching the Bible in a public school. It did not involve the NCBCPS or The Bible in History and Literature. However, NCBCPS was led to believe that when the lawsuit was filed it did involve its curriculum and sought to intervene in the lawsuit. The American Civil Liberties Union, one of the counsel in the case, objected and stated that the NCBCPS curriculum was not at issue. The motion to intervene was denied since neither the NCBCPS nor the Bible in History and Literature was a party to or a subject of the litigation. This was in 1998.
As you can see, these lawsuits were many years ago and are not at all material to your consideration. Additionally, there has never been and there is not now any lawsuit involving the NCBCPS or The Bible in History and Literature. Any suggestion or innuendo otherwise is made for the purpose of defaming the textbook or seeking an unfair competitive advantage.
It is noteworthy that The Bible in History and Literature is an often used and successful textbook. It has been in use since 1994 in 38 states, in 593 school districts, in 2,135 high schools and by 550,000 students. If you will, try to calculate how many eyes of school board members, superintendents, principals and administrative staff, school board attorneys, teachers, and parents have looked at this curriculum.
During all that time, absolutely no legal claims have been made against it and certainly there have been no constitutional challenges or findings against it. This is very valid and credible proof of the validity of The Bible in History and Literature as a secular textbook for teaching the Bible in public schools in a constitutional manner.
I hope this clarifies some things for you. I regret that you may have been misinformed in anyway. It is easily done since it is not a subject that is generally known to persons and the information is not readily available. This is not the first time that school boards and officials have been taken in by the deception and it will probably not be the last. I am glad that I could offer you this assistance in your deliberation.
Please feel free to let me know if you have questions or need any additional information. On behalf of the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools, I am,
Yours very truly,
A. Eric Johnston
Respond to this Letter to the Editor in the comment section below or by emailing thecommonerjournal(at)gmail.com.
Here’s a very balanced and factual summary of this curriculum:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Council_on_Bible_Curriculum_in_Public_Schools
Response to the Feb. 22, 2012 letter from A. Eric Johnston, attorney for the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools,
While I can’t speak to what others have heard, or why they are concerned about the inclusion of the proposed curriculum, I haven’t personally heard any vicious or unsupported statements about the textbook or curriculum currently under consideration.regarding litigation or anything else for that matter. I have certainly heard a number of people express reservations that it has a bias toward a particular ‘brand’ of Christianity, but just for the record, it’s the ‘brand’ that I favor myself, so I have no bias against that – but I suspect I might feel differently if I thought it’s ‘flavor’ was not one that I found appealing, elective or not. Still that isn’t my greatest concern.
Mr. Johnston’s letter doesn’t reassure me because it is provided by legal counsel whose interest is defending it’s own client, not the Vinton County Local School District, and it doesn’t really address the concerns I think we should have, so I will try to make them more specific this time. If any student(s)/parent(s) brings charges claiming that the teacher has overstepped the line and proselytized the class – even if the teacher is innocent – will it not cost this county/school board serious money to provide a defense?
Before I wrote expressing concern about setting legal precedents that might come back to bite us later. To elaborate upon that theme, I will wonder how many of my neighbors realize that the Department of Veterans Affairs has now approved the use of the Wiccan pentacle and 38 other religious symbols for use on tombstones at Arlington National Cemetery and other U.S. military burial grounds. How long will be be until these ‘other’ groups develop their own approved curricula and come forward to present school boards here and elsewhere? If the current curriculum is approved and later ones denied, it could very easily end in legal entanglements
I repeat that I am a believing Christian, and I love the Bible and value it above all other books both as a holy, divine, inspired text, and as a source of beautiful poetry, history and literature. Still, we are living in strange and unsettling times. In the interest of avoiding tunnel vision and seeing this as a more simple issue than it is, I hope the prayer warriors in this community will be holding our board members up in prayer as they weigh this matter as it could have far-reaching and unintended consequences in future.