Year: 1871

Tho Bible in the Public Schools.


Any words coming from such an authority
as the eloquent and scholarly pastor
of st. Stephens Catholic church in this city
are worthy of attention, but none more SO than
those relating to question which is now
agitating, not only this country, but certain
portions of fEurope-namely, the Christian edu-
cation of children. The controversy on this
subject has been provoked by the custom, SO
long established here as to have almost the
force and form of law, Of reading portion Of
the Bible at the opening of the public schools.
1t was fitting, therefore, that In Hunters Point,
where the controversy has produced such bad
blood, that DR.. McGlynn should, as he did last
night, by invitation, express bis mature
opinions and views on the merits of this ques-
tion. After stating the relation which the
Commonwealth bears to every form ofreligious
faith and worship, he declared that
local school boards were trying to es-
tablish form of religion as
against the specific declarations of the federal
and State constitutions to the contrary, and that
the conscences Of many are thereby wounded,
and sectarianism, which he greatly depre-S
Gated, is prospsred and encouraged. The
Doctor, we think, erred, however, in saying
that this is done in provocation and defiance
of the Catholic Church and its teachings We
can hardly conceive that any school board
would bs so illiberal as to enforce thing
because the Catholic Church forbade it.
Rather We believe the custom prevailed long
before the Catholics objected or raised their
voice against the reading of the Scriptures in
the schools; and, indeed, in some parts of the
land and of this State, the practice is as old as
the Commonwealth and older than the corpo-
rate existence of the Church here.


But the Doctors strongest argument lay in
the alleged enforcement of the Bible reading
upon Jewish children-provided, however,
that they object. Christians Of every name
Catholic or Protestant-hold the Scriptures Of
the Old and New Testament in common, but
the Jews reject the New and its teachings.
And yet. 80 far as any practical protest has
come from them, they are. content that
their children shall hear few verses
read every day rather than that
they should stay away from school. And
SO far as our experience reaches the principals
select their Scriptures from the Old Testament,
and generally short Psalm, few Proverbs
or something akin. But the Jewish parents do
not complain because they are enjoined in their
Bible to teach these Scriptures to their chill
dren as they 60 In and out and walk by the
way, at all times and in all places and under
all circumstances and conditions. Aud they
would hardly object to 1t in the place pecu-
liarly designed for instruction. Still, il the
consciences of weak brethren are wounded by
st. James version-and that seems to be the
great objecton-why not adopt another? Can
there be no compromise in this matter? Are
we so unchristian as to force our opinions and
creeds upon those who do not want themp
Surely there is better way, and we regret
that DR.. McGlynn did not point out some
method of compromise to the fiery and hot
headed Hunters Pointers of the differing
creeds who listened to his lecture last evening.
The absolute putting away of the Bible
would create just such a clamor from the other
side for its restoration as Is being now made
against it. And then we should be no better
off than we are and no nearer solution Of
the vexed question.