Search JTA's historical archive dating back to 1923

Daily Digest of Public Opinion on Jewish Matters

The charge that the Bible is now being read in the public schools and that the present movement to introduce the compulsory reading of the Ten Commandments is only one step in the direction of making religious instruction in the schools a law, is put forth by Hillel Rogoff, in the “Forward” of Jan. 28. […]

January 29, 1926
See Original Daily Bulletin From This Date
Advertisement

The charge that the Bible is now being read in the public schools and that the present movement to introduce the compulsory reading of the Ten Commandments is only one step in the direction of making religious instruction in the schools a law, is put forth by Hillel Rogoff, in the “Forward” of Jan. 28.

“The Bible is being read now to the pupils in the schools,” Mr. Rogoff charges. “The principals are not authorized to do it, but they do it nevertheless. The new proposal, however, would make the reading a law. This would make the Bible a subject in the curriculum and later the study of it could gradually be widened, broadened. In this way the religious fanatics and clergymen are hoping to smuggle the teaching of religion into the public schools.”

That the different religious groups could not agree on the code of ethics presented by the Ten Commandments and that the reading of the Decalogue in the schools would be a source of endless controversy, is the assertion made by Heywood Broun in the “World” of Jan. 27.

“Apparently,” Mr. Broun writes in part, “the advocates of the plan were surprised at the opposition which developed, for they proceeded on the assumption that practically all the varying religious groups could unite on this particular code of ethics. These optimists overlooked the fact that the self-same words may mean several things, not always similar, to several persons.

“One speaker,” Mr. Broun points out, referring to the hearing before the Board of Education, “said that the Decalogue was the core and foundation of all our legal codes. This statement is certainly debatable. In some respects our law directly opposes the teachings of this particular ethical system. For instance, in this State, the community assumes the right to kill under proper provocation regardless of the prohibition handed down from the mountain top.

“To a greater extent our civil codes ignore. and must ignore, the teachings of the Decalogue. Certainly, the State is not willing to undertake the establishment of monotheism by legislative enactment. There is nothing in the code to prevent the worship of many gods or of the making of graven images.In the matter of honoring parents, the community leaves the individual great latitude for his interpretation of the commandment.”

Recommended from JTA

Advertisement