THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

Otago Witness, Issue 1418, 25 January 1879, Page 6

THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

A meeting of persons favourable to the reintroduction of the daily reading of the Bible in the public schools of the Colony was held in the lower hall of the Athenseum on the 17th. Mr E. B. Oargill presided, and between 70 and 80 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 that they were assembled to consider the peculiar position in which the people of Otago found themselves in having the Bible practically excluded from their schools. They iound in these 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 inducements held out to them in leaving the Old Country was that they would enjuy in this Colony all the blessings of civil and religious liberty which their forefathers had conferred. This liberty depended mainly on the free possession of the Bible. In the past history of Otago the extension of the means of grace and of their schools had gone hand in hand. How was it that they now found the Bible prohibited ? In the Provincial Ordinance it was provided that the day-schools should be opened by a short prayer and the reading of ths Word of God. This had now been done away with, aad the Bible was treated as a forbidden book. How this had been brought about, and how the country had been led to acquiesce in such a thing, were the questions they had to consider. He' believed teat to a large class, both in town and country, the ejelusion of the Bible from the public schools w« exceedingly distasteful.— (Hear, hear.) He felt confident that, now that the. matter^ had been agitated, there was a widespread feeling of dissatisfaction. It placed the people in a false position, that they, as a Christian community, who regarded the Bible a3 the foundation of morality, and an all-important means of elevating their great national institutions, Bhould allow the Bible to be humiliated and banished. — (Hear, hoar.) When the question came before the Assembly there was a good deal of discussion on this matter. There was a numerous body who contended for the continuance of the Bible in the public schools. There were also secularists who held that the reading of the Bible was unfair, and would interfere with the attendance. He believed, however, that the secularists were never very powerful, that they had more noise than force, and that their power had waned rapidly. The Roman Catholics objected to the Bible, but not to religious teaching. On the contrary, he had it from Bishop Moran that he abhorred the exclusion of religion from schools, find that he would rather have the children of Catholics taught in tho Protestant schools than in schools in which there was no religion! The fact was that the Catholics and the secularists stood at opposite poles on this question. He admitted that direct religion could not be taught in schools, and that teachers were disinclined, and in many instances uufitted, for imparting religious dogmas; but it was a different thing to have everything in the shape of religion excluded. The eil'ect of banishing the Bible from the school could not bo otherwise than bad on '< the minds of tho children. It v/iw also conti !\ry to wlmt Uioy wi.-herf. They regarded the ] Biblo as a etaudard of faith to be read in their 1 homos, and to touch their children that it i?

bad and must be injurious to them was inconsistent and ridiculous. The subject rested near the hearts of the people, and he believed if the people 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.— (Applause.) The Eev. Lindsay Mackie moved the first resolution as follows :—" That, inasmuch as any system of education which does not provide for (religious instruction is in the opinion of this meeting defective, it ia desirable that the daily reading of the Bible in the public schools of the Colony be established by law." He Baid there was no doubt cause for surprise that they should be met at this time of the day for a purpose such as that for which they were assembled. But they must not be discouraged at the fact that they had to fight old battles over again. It was one of the characteristics of the development of the race that every improvement was accompanied by a displacement of the old equilibrium. Of all the questions that interested the human mind and affected the well-being ef the race, this one of education might be expected from its importance to have reached a settled and permanent position. But they found, on the contrary, it was the most unfixed of all. Both at Home and in the Colonies the subject of national education had received but recent attention, and the Education Acts introduced could only be regarded as Wtmtative. In these Colouies it was urged that \ education should be free, secular, and corn\pulsory. There was. however, a great difference of opinion as regarded these principles. The State held that the child could only be qualified to become a citizen by being taught to read, write, and cypher. In coming forward as they were doing to insist on the reading 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 possible. This was the 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 was educated. There was no desire on the part of the Church or the community t& supplant national education by denominational. — (Applause.) He believed the Churches would object to the burden being ca^t 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 should be religious. They held that a religious system was preferable to a Becular or unseclarian system. — (Applause.) He maintained that a secular teaching without religion was not sufficient, and that an elevating religious power was essential to the formation of true manhood. In the Victorian and New Zealand Education Acts it was originally intended that the doors of the school should be left open to the ministers of religion. They had a prescriptive right to a religious system. The State had stepped in and taken the place of the parent. Something more was needed to make a good citizen than a knowledge of how to read, write, and cypher. What they wanted was, not clever men, but good men. This could only be secured by combining with good moral teaching religious instruction. The British Empire was honeycombed through and through with the principles of revealed religion. — (Cheers.) Their civil rights and liberties were based on the old code of laws given on Mount Sinai to Moses. He mentioned that the marriage law of the Scriptures formed the foundation of the social code which bound up their family life, and that the civil and judicial system was indebted to the Bible for its very essence. The State had the right to see that man shall not be irreligious. If a person overstepped too far the bounds of morality, the State claimed the right of interference; yet the State could not fairly claim the right of punishing the street gamin for stealing, if it made no provision, to prevent its developing into a criminal. Neither could it plac6 the Bible in the hands of juvenile wituesses, and coDJnre them to tell the truth in the name of God, if it had taken no steps to let them know them know the meaning of that name.—(Applause.) It was said that the parents and the Church should see to religious instruction ; 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 instruction complete. The State system of education was like a widespread net with a narrow mesh, in which all the children can be gathered together and taught morality. — (Cheers.) The Bible stood alone, unique in its literature, sublime in its aspirations, universal, profound in its principles of morality, and admirable in its ideals, and nothing was so fitted to improve the minds of children as this book.— (Applause.) Mr J. Aitken Connell seconded the resolution. He ventured to believe that any attempt to educate children without combining religious instruction would be altogether unsuccessful. His own experience as a teacher told him so. The speaker proceeded to giyo a short sketch of the history of the education question in England, Scotland, and America, quoting from the report of a Eoya] Coxnmisaion on Education furnished in 1867, from which it appeared that the Biblo was read in the schools of the United States and Canada. He also quoted at length from the report of the Privy Council on Education to her Majesty in 1875, and read the recommendations of the inspectors iv favour of Bible-reading. He called attention to the fact that the Bible was reau in the whole of the schools under the London Board of Education, and remarked that it was singular the Bible should be tolerated in the schools of a city containing millions of inhabitants, while here in New Zenland, with our limited population, it was 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 gwutlemen, with power to add to their number, be appointed a committee :-— llevs. Lindsay Mackie, Dr Copland, Dr Eoseby ; E. B. Cargill, Esq., Thos. Dick, Etq., W. M. Hodgkins, Esq., W. D. Stewart, Esq., J. Aitken Oonnell, Esq., James Mackerras, Esq., Eobert Glendining, E-q., J. S. Webb, Esq., J. 0-. Eraser, Esq., Arthur Scoullar, Esq., Wm. Brown, Esq., A. C. Begg, E-q., Hugh M'Neil, Esq., John Oargill, Esq., Keith Eamsay, Esq., James Brown, Esq., E. A. Lawson, Esq., Andrew Thomson, Esq. (L J ort Chalmers), Wm. Elder, E t q. (Port Chalmers), John Mitchell, Esq. (Port Chalmers) A. 0. Strode, E*q. (Port Chalmers), and Hie Mover*" He suggested that the Protestant community, and especially the Presbyterians, should _ emulate the example of the Eoman Catholics, and make their power felt politically. If they did so, he felt certain there was not a man would venture on the hustings m Otago and &ay he would vote for the exclusion of tho Bible. — (Applause.) If they made the question a political matter they wouldjsoon bring some of their politicians to their souses. He contended that nearly every book was more or less .sectarian, and that purely Becular education was impossible. Children without religion were like shipi without ballast. The bpeaker quoted from the l3t chapter of Eoiaaua to bhow what secularism woultl pro.

duce, and from the 4th chapter of Proverbs to show how admirably adapted certain portions of the Bible were for the instruction of children. Mr Thomas Dick seconded the resolution, and in doing so urged that the friends of the Bible should make their influence felt at the election of representatives in Parliament, on the Education Board, aud in school committees. Mr Park suggested that petitions on the subject should be forwarded to the schools for the signatures of parents, and Mr Begg promised that this would have the attention of the Committee. The resolution was then put and carried, and the meeting closed.