Bible in Schools.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLI, Issue 8068, 19 August 1905, Page 7

Bible in Schools.

(To tha Editor}

j' Sm,-Permit me to note a few points in Mr Greville's Jetter on this subject in your issue of Monday. Against my statement that' it is time the people! of New Zealand, and especially those who reverence their Bibles, were awakening to the fact that this is mainly a fight between Christian men and women on the one hand, and Agnostics and Indifferehtists on the other, Mr Greville quotes Bishop Wallis's admission thatthere are Christian men in the ranks of our opponents. About this I note two points : — First, I made the same admission, so that the quotation as against me hhs no point; and secondly, Mr Greville's quotation from Bishop Wallis is only part, and that the less important part of the Bishop's statement. Dr Wallis wenj on to state that in spite of that fact this is mainly a fight between religion and secularism ; so that the Bishop's statement and mine entirely agree. But' what are we to think of the ethics of Mr Greville in suppressing half the Bishop's statement, and then quoting the other half as against me. We usually use a very strong and very uncomplimentary term about a proceeding of that kind. And I repeat my statement that the names which Mr Greville gave as the leaders of the opposition to Bible-in-Schools'are sufficient to remind us that the strongest opposition 16 coming from men whose Agnosticism is known. And that fact should make those" who reverence their Bibles think what they are doing when they do not support us. Mr Greville's answers'to my questions i are very unsatisfactory." I note three of them:—

(1) To the question: " How can the exclusion from the schools of the book, a knowledge of which is essential to the study of English history and literature, be justified on educational grounds ?" To this Mr Greville replies they can get this knowledge outside the schools. Of course they can ; but that does not alter the fact that it is ridiculous to exclude from the school the one book, a knowledge of which is essential for a study of history and literature. "What would we say of anyone who proposed to exclude grammar from the schools, and then said that they could learn grammar outside the schools. Our reply to both is that the schools ought to give the essentials for the foundation of a good education, and that, therefore, both grammar and Bible knowledge should receive v prominent place in the curriculum.

(2) To the question: "Is it democratic to prevent the majority having. Bible lessons for their children if they wish them?" Mr Greville replies: " Yes, where the conscience of the people is affected." But be it observed that it is not proposed to interfere with the consciences of the minority. The conscience clause provides for that. And then are the consciences of the majority not to be considered? The majority conscienti ously demand that their children be allowed to receive Bible-lessons in school, and propose carefully to protect the consciences of the minority, and the minority not content with having their consciences protected, seek to take advantage of the political situation to trample' on the rights of the majority. This is thoroughly undemocratic and is tyrannical in the last degree. (3) My first question was, " Since in most Protestant countries those who wish to have Bible lessons for their children are allowed to have them, and since experience has shown that this can be done without injury to the school system, is it not an injustice to refuse this privilege to a majority of the people of New Zealand if they wish it ?" To this Mr Greville merely replies, " I do not agree with Mr Jolly's premises so the question has no point." Now let your readers l observe what this means. In my premises there are two statements. —First, that in most Protestant countries those who wish it are. allowed to have Bible lessons. This, even Mr Greville will not deny. The other statement, that experience has shown that Bible lessons do not injure the school system, our opponents simply meet with a denial. Now, I challenge any one ok them to mention a single country where Bib'e lessons have injured the school system. The reports of the American Bureau of Education and the New South "Waks Department of Public Instruction both say it works well with them. Mr Gray says this is established beyond the shadow of a doubt. Mr Greville merely denies.—l am, etc., Isaac Jolly. August 18th.