God vs. Evolution in U.S. Public Schools - William Jennings Bryan in 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial

Cal State ^ | 1925 | William Jennings Bryan

[GoldenState_Rose]

Religion is not hostile to learning; Christianity has been the greatest patron learning has ever had. But Christians know that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom" now just as it has been in the past, and they therefore oppose the teaching of guesses that encourage godlessness among the students.

Do bad doctrines corrupt the morals of students? We have a case, Mr. Darrow, one of the most distinguished criminal lawyers in our land, was engaged about a year ago in defending two rich men's sons who were on trial for as dastardly a murder as was ever committed. The older one, "Babe" Leopold, was a brilliant student, 19 years old. He was an evolutionist and an atheist. He was also a follower of Nietzsche, whose books he had devoured and whose philosophy he had adopted. Mr. Darrow made a plea for him, based upon the influence that Nietzsche's philosophy had exerted upon the boy's mind.

Christians desire that their children shall be taught all the sciences, but they do not want them to lose sight of the Rock of Ages while they study the age of the rocks; neither do they desire them to become so absorbed in measuring the distance between the stars that they will forget Him who holds the stars in His hand.

It is for the jury to determine whether this attack upon the Christian religion shall be permitted in the public schools of Tennessee by teachers employed by the State and paid out of the public treasury. This case is no longer local: the defendant ceases to play an important part. The case has assumed the proportions of a battle royal between unbelief that attempts to speak through so-called science and the defenders of the Christian faith.

[Terry L Smith]

The only “true” thing about Christianity is, that if y’all ain’t my particular denomination, or my particular church, y’all ian’t a true Christian!”

That very point of hypocrisy, in spades, was added to the equation of why I left Pentecostalism.

[blackpacific]

I can understand that. I worked with a lot of christians who did seem to spend a lot of time making sure that the other christians they rubbed elbows with were “true believing”.

In the Catholic Church the sacrament of Confession gets rid of that concern by focusing one on one’s own spiritual condition, with the goal to stop particular sins and eradicating predominant faults. It is a wonderful sacrament.

[Terry L Smith]

This may seem crass.

The question is: “Should an individual ‘confess their sins’ to another human being, or to the Creator themself?”

I might be a bit ‘off’ about ‘the church’. My first 3 years of school were peppered with sitting in the waste bucket, behind the closed door of the coat closet, knuckles rapped with wood rulers, and a few times with the nun’s noticeable complete handprint on my face. Lastly, when my friend ran into a busyy street after a ball, during yhe funeral service, the priest pointed at me, blamed me before the whole crowd

[blackpacific]

It’s a good question. The priest is an alter Christus, when one confesses to the priest one confesses to Christ and it is Christ who forgives. The priest is the matter of the Sacrament while it is Christ who is the agent. St. Thomas covers your question here:
https://www.newadvent.org/summa/5008.htm

Jesus Christ instituted this Sacrament for our benefit, not because He needed it this way but as a help to our frail nature, which has been wounded by sin.

I went to a Catholic school where it was obvious that some of the nuns had joined a teaching order, but had no natural talent for teaching. So those nuns were perpetually frustrated. Then there were other nuns who were naturally gifted at teaching and their classroom was a joy to be in.