The Hunter’s Point Bible War

Catholic World Report ^ | November 13, 2013 | John B. Buescher

[vladimir998]

“Is that what you meant?”

I wrote what I meant. No editing on your part is needed.

[vladimir998]

“Not what I said.”

I didn’t say it was. I asked a question.

“That is what your fellow Catholic said.”

So?

“So please enlighten me as to where and how the phrase “For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen” conflicts with Roman Catholic doctrine.”

1) I’m not “Roman Catholic”. I am Catholic and so is my Church.

2) The doxology doesn’t. But Protestant services do. Since that was appended to the Pater Noster by Protestants in the English speaking world it smacks of a Protestant service. Hence, the problem. The Irish were particularly sensitive to this because of the more than 200 years of vicious Protestant oppression of their people, land, culture, religion and freedom.

[xone]

You could drop the word ‘ostensibly’. I might buy that, but the end result is the same; God out.

[xone]

So the law isn't the law unless a Protestant agrees with it

Mal legis non lex. The 'law' was the interpretation of the priest.

I should have known that people refuse to accept as a fact the direct statement by Christ Himself, "This is my body", would be four square behind ignoring mere laws they don't like.

Then you should know that some who don't refuse to accept that statement also are four-square behind ignoring unjust laws and illegal ones as well. I guess I should have known that people that accept their org moving priests around to other parishes to hide their wrongdoings would accept the interpretation of a law by the priest.

[Rashputin]

Albany, i.e. the State of New York established the regulations, something else those who prefer their own fantasies to factual history either missed ignored for the sake of pretending that standing in the swamp is taking the high ground.

The local school board cannot just ignore State regulations although the very Barry idea of refusing to enforce laws Barry doesn't like is exactly what was being proposed. State regulations have the force of law but that's apparently subject to the approval of the comprehension challenged when it's time to twist and revise history to suit their agenda.

[xone]

Albany, i.e. the State of New York established the regulations

Shouldn't be any problem for a law abider to give chapter and verse then. Course back then they may not have had all the ed regs but that may go agin a factual history type. Either way if one wants to repeat an assertion, prove it.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

So it has nothing to do with the statement violating Roman Catholicism it was that they wanted to throw a tantrum and that was the nail their grievance on.

Got it.

It sounds like the article was correct. This was simply a way to get rid of any semblance of religion in schools.

[vladimir998]

“So it has nothing to do with the statement violating Roman Catholicism it was that they wanted to throw a tantrum and that was the nail their grievance on.”

No, it has to do with continued Protestant oppression of Catholics - something these particular Catholics had to put up with for many years already. That’s why they fled Ireland in the first place.

“Got it.

Apparently you don’t.

“It sounds like the article was correct. This was simply a way to get rid of any semblance of religion in schools.”

Protestant religion, yes. Protestant control of religion, yes.

[Religion Moderator]

Both of you attributing motives in broad strokes that would include each other is a thinly veiled way of making this thread "about" individual Freepers, i.e. yourselves.

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

[Rashputin]

the fact is clearly stated in the article. No other reference required.

[xone]

the fact is clearly stated in the article.

There was a requirement for Bible reading or services. The Catholic uproar led to this:

to petition the New York State Board of Education to void the requirement for Bible reading or religious services.

That the Board offered compromise was illegal is not in the article, what is is this:

Indeed, this Catholic writer, like many others, actually saw the gravest harm to the faith of Catholic students from the Liberal, “indifferentist,” and “secular” curriculum plan, which did not admit its godless assumptions, and not from overt Protestant catechizing in their schools (which could be easily countered at home and at church): “The evil lies elsewhere. This is the indifferentist education when it is not Protestant, which is the wooden horse by which heresy and unbelief want to break into the citadel of the Church, and it is against that, therefore, that the true friends of religion will direct their efforts.”

But instead other voices prevailed leading to this:

Given the situation, then, that some number of Catholic children would be attending public schools, many of the clergy and the parents concluded that it would be acceptable, as long as their children were not required to participate in religious instruction.

Which action resulted in the uproar in the schools, the rejection of a Catholic oriented compromise and the expulsion over time of God from the schools.