BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19374, 24 December 1932, Page 19

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

THE CATHOLIC VIEW. The Roman Catholic view concerning the Bible in schools question is set forth in a pastoral letter by Archbishop Redwood. “For many reasons,” states the letter, “it is desirable that the Catholic clergy and laity in this archdiocese should have correct ideas about the question of the Bible in schools. Accordingly this brief statement of the case is appropriate. “In order to teach all men divine truth Jesus Christ established His Church, a teaching organisation, to speak to the world in His name with His authority. This teaching church was in existence long before a single line of the New Testament was written. It was the teaching church which gathered together the books of the Bible and officially decided which books belonging to the Bible 'and which do not. It was the church that through the centuries preserved the Scriptures. The Protestants of the sixteenth century took their Bible from the church, and also their belief in its divine inspiration. Bible Religion.

“Bible reading in public schools is tantamount to the State’s recognition of the ‘Bible religion’ of Protestants. As we all know, Protestantism makes the Bible the sole and supreme rule of faith and morality. Bible Christianity is a formal denial of the Church, of her divfne authority and mission. It strives to abrogate the church which Christ instituted, and in its place seeks to substitute a book. “Protestant Bibles, whether it be King James’s version or any other version, omit seven books from the Old Testament and section of two other books—namely, Tobias, Judish, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and sections of Esther and Daniel. They relegate them to an appendix and label them as ‘apocryphal’ (spurious books), a designation which, cannot but lower them in the estimation of the reader. These books and sections, which Protestant versions omit, were in the Bible for sixteen cenuries. The Catholic Church canonised them and defined their inspiration, just as she did for the other books of the Bible. The Church still holds this ancient belief of the one united Christian Church. Should State and public school authority impose the reading of a Protestant version in the public schools, they would thereby adopt and endorse the Protestant canon of Scripture, and with the authority of law and prestige of State impose this tenet on Catholic taxpayers. The problem, then, as to what Bible would be used in the public schools, whether it be a Catholic, Protestant, or Jewish version, .offers almost insurmountable difficulties.

Equally Unsatisfactory. “The plan to read only certain passages from the Bible is equally unsatisfactory. By the fact that they are mere sections, they exclude the Bible as a whole, and in this way infringe on the religious convictions of Catholics. Again these selected readings have to be colourless, so as not to offend anyone. This great New Testament passages on the Church, the primacy of St. Peter, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, would have to be a non-dogmatic, diluted form of Christianity. The Jew, in turn, would oppose everything distinctly Christian, and insist upon the reading principally from the Old Testament. Furthermore, the reading of passages from the Bible can hardly be more than a literary exercise, unless it be accompanied by an interpretation. Now, it is of supreme importance that Catholics should know that interpretation of inspired books is not a matter of private judgment, and that the church cannot allow anybody to interpret the Bible for Catholic children who is not appointed by her and under her control. “These considerations show the practical impossibility of the Bible in schools in this country, and therefore its condemnation at the bar of reason and justice/’