THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 5276, 18 January 1879, Page 3

THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

A meeting of persons favourable to the re introduction of the daily reading of the Bible in the public schools of tbe Colony was held in tbe lower hall of the Atkenseum laat evening. Mr E. B. Cargill presided, and between 70 and SO persons were present. Apologies for nonattendance were read from the Revs. A. Blake*, L. Moore, Dr Roseby, and Mr James Fulton, the writers expressing their entire sympathy with the movement.

The Chairman said tbat they were aß3embled to consider the peculiar position in which the people of Otago found themselves in having the Bible practically excluded from their schools. They found in theae stirring times that with the stream of events they were drifting in a direction that might well fill them with alarm. If they looked back to the early settlement of Otago, they would find that one of the original and great inducenieuta held out to them in leaving the Old Countiy was that they would enje.y in thia Colony all tho bleaaings of civil and religioua liberty which their ie.refathers had conferred. Thia liberty depended mainly on the free possession of the Bible. In the past history of Otago tho extension of the means cf grace and of their schools bad gone hand in hand. How waa it that they now found tha Bible prohibited? In tho Piovincial Ordinance it was provided that the day-schools should bo opened by a short prayer and the reading of the Word of God. This had now been done away with, and the Bible waa treated as a forbidden book. How this had bean brought about, and how the country had been led to acquiesce in such a thing, were the questions they had to consider. He believed tnat to a large claas, both in towu and country, the exclusion of the Bible from the public schools was exceedingly distasteful.—(H. ar, bear.) He felt confident that, now that tho matter had been agitated, there was a widespread feeling of dia satisfaction. It placed tho people in a falne position, that they, aa a Christian community, wbo regarded the Bible aa the foundation of morality, and an all-important means ot elevating their great national institutiona, should allow the Bible to be humiliated and banished. —(Hear, hear.) When the question came before the Assembly there waa a good deal of dirscuasion on this matter. There was a numerous body who contended for_ the continuance of the Bible in the public schoola. There were also secularists wbo held that the reading of the Bible wa3 unfair, and would interfere with tbe attendance. He believed, however, that the secularists were never very powerful, that they had more noise than force, and tbat their power had waned rapidly. The Roman Catholics objected to the Bible, but not to religious teaching. On the contrary, ho had it from Bishop Moran that he abhorred the exclusion of religion from schools, and that he would rather have the children of Catholics taught in the Protestant sohoote than in schools in which thtre waa no religion. ' The fact waa that the Catholics and . the secularists stood at opposite poles on this question. He admitted _ that direct ! religion could not be taught in schoola, and that teachers were diainclinod, anil ; in many instances unfitted, for imparting reli- • gioua dogmas; but it was a different thing to i have everything in the shape of religion ex I eluded. The effect of banishing the Bible from i the school could not be otherwise than bad on

the minda of the children. It waa also contrary to what they wished. They regarded the Bible as a standard of faith to bo r- a 1 in their homes, and to teach their children that ifc is bad and must be injurious to them was inconsistent and ridiculous. The subject rest dn> ar the hearts oi tbe people, and he believed if tLe peuple were polled to morrow the number who would be found voting for the exclusion of the Bible from the public schools would be found to be a miserable minority.— (..pplaune.) The Rev. Lindsay Mackie meived the iral. reaolution aa follow.:—" That, iaasmuch as any system of education whicb does not provide for "religious instruction is in the ..pinion jof thia meeting defective, it ia desirable that the daily reading of the Bible in the public schoola of the Colony be established by law."

He said there was no doubt cause for surprise that they should be met at this time of the day for a purpose Buch as that for which they were assembled. But they must not be dwopjiragecl at the fact that they had to fight old battles over again. It was ono of the characteristics of the development of the race that every improvement was accompanied by a displacement of the old equilibrium. Of all tbe questions that interested the human mind aud anected the well-being of the raco, thia one of educa- ! tion might be expected from ita importance to have reached a settled and permanent position. But they found, ou the contrary, it was the most unfixed of all. Both at Home and in tbe Colonies the subject of national education had received but recent attention, and the Education Acts introduced could only be regarded as tentative. In these Colonies it waa urged that education should be free, secular, and compulsory. There was, however, a great difference of opinion as regarded theae principles. The State held that the child could only be qualified to become a citizen by being taught to read, write, and cypher. Iv coming forward aa they were doing to insist on the roading of the Bible, it could hardly be said that they were seeking unduly to interfere with existing arrangements. The question was still undefined and unsettled, and they were entitled to discuss it, and improve it if posaible. This waa tbe right they claimed in seeking the re-intro-duction of the Bible in the public schools.— (Cheers.) It was affirmed that it was the privilege of every child to be educated, and it was the duty of the State to see that it wa3 educated. There was no desire on the part of the Church or the community to supplant national education by denominational.—(Applause.) He believed the Churches would object to the burden being caat on their shoulders, and that if again tried the denominational system Would be found more costly and inefficient than the national. They were met simply to contend that the national system Bhould be religious. They held tbat a religious system was prefer able to a secular or unaectarian system. — (Applause.) He maintained that a secular teaching withe.ut religion was not aufficient, and tbat an elevating religioua power waa essential to the formation of true manhood. In the Victorian and New Zealand Education Acts it was originally intended that the doora of the school should be left open to the ministers of religion. They had a prescriptive right to a religioua system. The State had stepped in and taken the place of the parent. _ Something more waa needed to make a good citizen than a knowledge of how to read, write, and cypher. What they wanted waa, not clever men, but good men. This could only be secured by combining with good moral teaching religioua instruction. The British Empire was phoneycombed through and through with the principles of revealed religion.—(Cheers.) Their civil rights and liberties wero based on the old code of laws given on Mount Sinai to Mosea. He mentioned that the marriage law of the Scrip turea formed tho foundation of the social code which bound up their family life, and that the civil and judicial system waa indebted to the Bible for its very essence. Tho State had the right to see that man shall nc4 be irreligious. If a person overstepped too far the bounds of morality, the State claimed the right of interference; yet the State could nit fairly claim the right of punishing the street gamin for stealing, if it made no provision to prevent its developing iato a criminal. Neither could it plac6 tho Bible in the bands of juvenile witueases, and conjure thorn to tell the truth in the name of God, if it had taken no steps to let them kuow them know tl.o meaning of tbat name.—(Applause.) It was said that the parenta and the Church should tee to religioua in3truction; but both had a right to turn round and insist on the State, since it had undertaken the duty of educating the young, making that inatruction complete. The State system of education waa like a widespread not with a narrow mesh, in which all the children can be gathered together and taught morality.—(Cheera.) The Bible stood alone, unique in its literature, sublime in its aspirations, universal, profound in its principlss of morality, and admirable in its ideals, and nothing was so fitted to improve the minds of children as thia book.—(Applause.)

Mr J. Aitken Connell seconded the resolu

tion. He ventured to believe that any attempt to educate children without combining religious instruction would be altogether unsuccessful. Hia own experience aa a teacher told him so. The speaker proceeded to give a short sketch of the biatory of the education question in England, Scotland, and America, quoting frnin the report of a Royal Commission on Education furniahed in 1567, from which it appeared that the Bible was read in the schools of the United States and Canada. He also quoted at length frcm the report of the Privy Council on Education to her Majeaty in 1875, and read the recommendations of tbe inspectors in favour of Bible-reading. He c.-dled attention to the fact that tho Bible was read in the whole of tbe schoola under the Loudon Board of Education, and remarked th~,t it waa singular the Bible should be tolerated in the schoola of a city containing millions of inhabitanta, while hero in New Zealand, with our limited population, it waa excluded.

The resolution was put, and carried unanimously. Mr A, C. Begg moved the next resolution—

" That in order to give effect to the preceding resolution, the following crftntlemen, with power to add to their number, bs appointed a committee :—Revs. Lindsay Mackie, Dr Copland, Dr Roseby; E. B. Cargill, Esq., Thos. Dick, Esq., W. M. Hodgkins, Esq., W. D. Stewart, Esq., J. Aitken Connell, Esq., James Mackerras, Er--q., Robert Glendining, E-q., J. S. Webb, Erg., J. G. Fraser, Esq., Arthur Scoullar, Esq., Wm. Brown, Esq., A. C. Begg, E-q., Hugh M*Neil, Esq., John Cargill, Erg., Keith Ramsay, Esq., Jamea Brown, Eaq., R. A. Lawson, Esq., Andrew Thomson, Esq. (Port Chalmers), Wm. Elder, E-q. (Port Chalmers), John Mitchell, Esq. (Port; Chalmers), A. C. Strode, E-q. (Port Chalmers), and the Mover." He suggested tbat the Protestant community, and especially the Presbyterians, should emulate the example of the Roman Catholica, and make their power felt politically. If they did so, he felt certain tin ro was not a man would venture on

the hustings in Otago and say he would vote for the exclusion of the Bible.—(Applause.) If tbey made the question a political matter they wouldjsoon bring somtQof their politicians to their senaes. He contended that nearly every book was more or leaa sectarian, and that purely secular education was impossible. Children without re'igion wera like ships without ballast. The speaker quoted from the lat chapter of Romana to allow what secularism would produce, and from the 4th chapter of Proverb 3 to show bow admirably adapted certain portions of tbe Bible wero for the instruction of children.

Mr Thomas Dick seconded the resolution, and in doing so urged that the friends of tbe Bible should make their influence felt at tbe election of representatives in Parliament, on the Education Board, aud in school comrrit-

Mr Park suggested that petitions on the subject should be forwarded to tbe schoola for the signature 3of parents, and Mr Begg promised that this would have the attention of the Committee.

The resolution was then put aud carried, and die meeting closed.