BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 5729, 26 October 1905, Page 2

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

(To the Editor, “N.Z. Times.”) Sir, —The Bihle-iu-Schools League’s manifesto in to-day’s “Times” seems a very tame affair, after the wild blusters aiid denunciations that have preceded it. A few months since, when special subscriptions were asked for, to appoint Mr Wright, tho league’s representative, at £3OO per annum and expenses, w© wero told of great things to ba done—meetings held, league centres formed everywhere, copies of the textbook froely distributed—so that all could see what was sought to bo taught in tho schools; hut how little seems to have been accomplished. The reason why, of course, is plain—little sympathy with the cause, but few bawbees and lack of confidence in tho clerical loaders. Mr Wright held a league meeting in Tiniaru on the Ist inst., of which fixe “Herald’* of tho find inst. reports“Mr Wright insisted at the outset that tho league is not asking for the introduction of the Bible into the schools, hut for a political right; the right to a referendum to settle a question that the Legislature does not settle, in accordance with what the members- believe to be the desire of tho majority of tho people.” Thus tho churches and religious meeting-houses, which sro allowed to be exempt from taxation, are turned into political headquarters, to hold meetings in. and collect subscriptions for political purposes. Surely it is timo such exemption from taxation ceased, as it causes others to pay more than theft - duo. The so-called “Bible-in-schools League” cannot have pinch respect for tho Bible to thus drag it in the dirt. If there be a political party who wish to govern and ho governed by. referendum, why should not it act openly, instead of acting under cover of the league cloak? At the Wellington Anglican Synod in July tho Rev 0. 0. Harper, in moving “That this Synod urge most strongly on all church people the duty of doing their utmost to further the objects of tho Bible-in-schools League,” added, “There could bo no doubt in any mind but that they—tho league—intended to teach the Christian religion. They would put the miracles before tho children because they intended them to believe them. Ho agreed with. tho remarks of tho Bishop, in his charge, that tho present was a fight between Christianity and secularism.” When the president of tho league, Rev Dr Gibb, moved tho adoption of tho annual report in St. John's in November, ho said “they, did not ask, and never had asked, that tho duty should bo imposed upon tho teacher to enlarge upon the language of the Bible, he should confine his efforts to giving tho children an explanation of tho grammatical intention c;f tho sentences. How very different is this from tho Rev Harper’s statement; and by tho proposed text-book lessons, the teaclung of tho miracles to the children was certainly intended. In the junior lessons from the New Testament they would be forced to believe that once illness, and being deaf, dumb, or blind, was caused by an evil spirit inhabiting the person that seemed ill,' and was not caused by disease. Such teaching now should be criminal. Tho Dean of Westminster, just a year ago, strongly denounced the teaching of children untruths, such as the Creation story in Genesis, oi) that there was ever a talking serpent or a talking ass. We must teach them truth, and “not stories that they will afterwards have to unlearn.” Why then should the children’s and teachers’ time be wasted and confidence broken to support purely a fetish? —I am, etc. ’ B. WIGHTMAN. October 24th.