THE "CONSCIENTIOUS" OBJECTION TO UNSECTARIAN EDUCATION.

Thames Advertiser, Volume VII, Issue 1787, 13 April 1874, Page 3

THE "CONSCIENTIOUS" OBJECTION TO UNSECTARIAN EDUCATION.

Peoji an address by the Eev. 0. B. ritblado, of Halifax, N,S., oa edacatioa, wo make the following extract "Bat it is in the name of ooascieuqo that tli« fiercest opposition to our school system is presented; They tell, us that it 'is irreligious.'' godless,' 'atheistical.' It aggrieves their conscience, they say, because it does not provile; the' theological instruction for their children. Now, it is needless to say that our is chargeable with' this negative offence which is its chief excellence. It does not teach any theological system of roligion. : It aims at being unsectarian— at interfering with no religious belief. Men of all creeds miy take advantage of its benefits. The sys-. tem teaches reading, writing, and suoh like useful branches, and it inculcates by the example of teachers and precepts of reoognised text books the fear of God and the necessity of a life of; morality. 'But this,' cry the adversaries, is not enough. It should teach our peculiar religious beliefs. We do not say the food you supply is poisonous in" itself, but it is not wholesome unless served up with our theological sauoe. Che system should provide for paying the. cook for making and serving up this sauce wherever it is required—no matter if three-fourths of the people of the province believe that it is a soul destroying poison The seed you sow is not weeds, but it is not good unless mi <ed with the seed from our religious sowing-sheet, and the system should provide for paying the sower who mixes hn seed with the grain found in our theoligical granary-no muter though the three-fourths of the people believe that grain to ba tne seeds of deadly error. The charge against the system is not that it teaches positive error, bat that it teaches no religion. It is coniemned for what it does not do. . Ij; does n)t provide the meias of payiig,; teachers to propagate certain' definite theological tenets. The obj motors are left perfectly free to disseminate theic own religious views, but they protend to be aggrieved because the Government does not undertake to do it for them, through the educational system. Now, suppose a community of Chinese settle in our country. They wish to bring up their childrea in the faith of Buddhism. They say. to the oflioers of the law,, we cannot conscientiously send our children to your school because in it tiiey do not teaoli the tenets of our ration. Now, we olaiia the right of getting atsaeher for ourselves, a nun after our own heart, setting up an idol in our sohool-house and teaohing our children the practices and doctrines of our iioUtrous worship. We will teach reading, writing and arithmetic along with it, but Buddhism we must have taught, or we will have nothing.' Suppose in these circumstances tue teacher draws all his grants from the treasury, would the G ivernment and the people who countenanoe the Governments be supporting idolatry? .And what, in this case, becomes of the consciences of three-fourths of the people ot the provic.ee who believe that it is wrong for the Government to lend itself to the dissemination of any theological opinioda whatever ? Are they to bd forced into a compromise against their- will?; We leave men's conscience' free ; until they , compel us to do wrong. Now we leave the ikddhist free to teaoh his doctrines as he phases, but he must not ask us to : become.a known abettor to such teaching by paying taxes for its support ani en«. dowing it through the Government. Suppose a mm says to me, ' I oannot conV scientiously driuk of the public water of, the city because it is not. mixed with whisky.' I would say, ' Well, draw off the water and mix it tor yourself. Ton are at perfect liaerty to do so.' But he replies, ' That is not what I wish. I demand a grant from the oity treasury to enable me to mix the water with whisky.' Then I reply, ' You violate my conscientious convictions, for I oannotpay taxes or support men in office for the purpose of supplying whisky to anyone.' Water we oan conscientiously supply to all with the firm belief that its use will injure no one. Water drugged with wuisky we can conscientiously give to none, though we leave them free to mix it for themselves. Education uudrugged by auyseotarianism wo oaa oonsciontiously give to all, and leave them free to drug it as they like; but cduoition drugged with what we regard as poisonous sectarian' dootrines we can conscientiously supply to none. We may leave men free to do wrong. We dare not help them to'do so." •