THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS
Ia the ourrent number of the "Par am,' Jardinal Manning draws a picture of the working of the common sohool system <f the Uojt.d Slates, and then answers ti e question proposed to him, whether the tit ble should be read m the publio and -oramon sohools of tha Amerioan Unloo. * Ire j aloe that It Is read ln the JBoard Sohools of England, even without a right ' Interpretation. It Ib better tbat ohlldren should know the name, tbe character, tha, work, the life, the parables of the Saviour of the world, than that they should grow up without the knowledge of Hla nam*. But It Is to be al>r aya borne m mtod that the Bible is ' tbe Bible only m the right sense of the Bible.' A man's will Is hU wiil only ln the intention of his will, and human jmtloe swiftly punishes the perversion of tha last teatameut of tbe de. ' parted. Bat with tbe law and the praotloo of the public aod com -non schools be fore me, I cannot soe— l. How the State om retain Ita par. ly secular oharaoter aod oilon if tbe Bible be introduced into the sohools. The Bible Is immutably a code of religion. 2. Nor how tbe State can order Its introduction without violating the religious oonaoleaoe and spiritual independence of tbe american people, 3. ttor how the reading of the Bible lo any sense but ita own true sense oan eduoa:e the children of Christian parents. 4. Nor how tbe reading of It oln counterbalance the intrinsic moral evils of the oommou sohool system especially In the violation of parental »n hotity and thde.iruotiou of the Jnstlnocs of home. The State has a right to protect Itself from tbe crimes committed by children who ate .abandoned by violous pr careless parents. It does so by reformatory and industrial sohools. The State haa a duty to protect the ohlldran abandoned by careless or criminal parents, and notably to pro teot the rlghti of suoh children to tbe Inheritance of a human and Christian education. B or these two ends compulsion is lawful aod just. What parents ought to do, and through their own unnatural abandonment of tbelr children do not do, the State has bath right and duty to provide for m loco parentis, whloh phrase declares that the at fie ts not the parent' aud that tbe ohlldren are not the ohlldren of the State. This theory of Athens lv Its corruption, and of France m its revived p.ganism, bai no plaoe or right m Oaristian, or evenpatural sooiety. Ado eat Rome would have made shcrt work of a>l suoh pretensions of the State ln violation of tho putria potcatao If there be m the world a people jealous j t-f liberty of oonsolenoe, and resolved to confine the powers of the State within he strict sphere of secular legislation, it is the people of the Amerioan Uutoh, But they bave unconsciously submitted to a system of publio and oumpahory edaoatlon which violates both thete vital lew* of their Constitution. Oompuliory eduoation, without free ohoioe and provision for that free choice ln matters of religion and otnsoteooe, Is, and ever mu.t'be, unjust and destructive of ?the moral life of a p jople. Lis not for me to suggest to tha mature wisd.m and rhe high jurisprudence of ihe statesmen of Amerlc. now the publio eohooi law suonid bo amended. It la clear iy to c_i»fliot with both parental rights anu liberty of ooaaotence. No education l*vr oan prosper which la not la 30pformity_ . with, p<irent-l rights and liberty of oonsolenoe* A Staieeduoation whloh is In oo.fl ot with these two laws ot aature and cf -God oan only work out confusion and end m a oaus.rophe. '
Permanent link to this item
THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS, Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 2153, 20 June 1889
THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 2153, 20 June 1889
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.