THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CVI, Issue 12570, 3 August 1901, Page 3

THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

TO TEE EDITOR.' ‘ 1 Six’, —A lot has been written lately about Bible-reading in schools. This morning (Wednesday) a gentleman who admits he has- only had two year's and- a - half experience in the colony, tenders his advice, based on the unwarrantable-, assertion of CanonHarper that juvenile crime was on the.increase and there was a low moral -tona among the young. Such assumption is directly antithetical to all statistics and our own experiences. Clerics, are like Prohibitionists, and for their own,purposes manufacture their own facts and do not hesitat* to foul their nests in so doing. The one says we want Bibles in schools, therefcra we wilf assert ohr young are depraved and immoral. / The other wants" prohibition, and therefore proclaims the colony,and' especially .the. town he may happen to I* in, -as drunken and debauched. If statistics and experience do not bear out their contentions, so much the worse .for statiitica and experience. I remember not two and a half years, but a time antedating our free, secular, and compulsory education, and I. make the assertion', based on statistics and experience, that the present-day children are better behaved,' more polite, intelligent'and moral than when the schools wera run' by ’ the' churches. Our ’school booksj from Standard X to Standard VI;, teem with truly moral lessons inculcating ■‘-‘reverence for/goodness and greatness,”' and also ,l a sense.of respect for things and people superior to themselves,” provided -that Superiority is the result of -truth, hoixesty -and morality, and not mere wealth. File gentleman wants'a “system of religious instruction that would be acceptable to all Protestant denominations,” an obvious impossibility. ■ But, then, how about the ■ Roman Catholics, Freethinkers, Jews, etc., etc., etc. ?• Are they ..to have no consideration in our free, secular and compulsory education, or by the introduction of the Bible are wetd'‘make our system no, longer .• free? , You could not makef.<the State pay for what a large proportion! of the population objects to; it could not -be secular, and it could not be compulsory when as many' could and would claim What part of the Bible ’is to be read? All of it is 'sacred and the word of God. Ga-u we say to our children read if all, it will improve your morals? I think not. There are passages, not isolated verses, but whole ' chapters, that no decent man, ,clenc , or lavman, dare read out loud to his assembled family. Is that a, book to introduce into our schools ? Those passages and chapter* would' soon be spotted, as ,-jve used’ to spot them forty years ago, if we had Bibles in our schools. That there are moral teachings in the Bible is admitted, but there are immoral ones, too, acording to twentieth century ethics. Then leave. the Bible out of school,' where it ’will create discord. School is! the" place; for our children to learn - morality, truthfulness, and mutual' respect, bpt this cannot be done if once the disturbing influence of the .Bible breaks oiip schools up into sects. The Bible is good in its .place, but tljat place is. not .our seen- - lar day schools. —I am, etc., ■ . „ *A CHAMPION OF YOUTH. ■