An Amazing Proposal

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXXIII, Issue 16, 20 April 1905, Page 2

An Amazing Proposal

Mr. J. McGregor, M.A., of Dunedin, speaks fcom -a nonCatholic point of \iew when he criticises the aims and methods of the Bible-in-schools movement. Catholics v, o.ild strongly dissent from many of the positions taken up in reference to the subject by Mr. McGregor. But when he takes in hand the leaders of the sectarianising party, he (so to speak) tars and feathers them, gives them a paternal lecture, arid turns them adrift. Here is how, in a special article in the ' Otago Daily Times,' he mops an amazing proposal that is being advancad by the paiS political agitator of the League. Mr. McGregor is describing what he personally saw and heard on a recent occasion in Dunedin. • The League's itinerant agent (says Mr. McGregor) ' went on to relate the case of a newspaper editor of his acquaintance who, on the paper changing hands, and likewise politics, went on writing to order and decrying what he had been wont to 'praise, and vice versa. Mr. Wright was so surprised at the conduct of the editor that he asked him to explain how he could act in such a manner ; and the answer he got was that he simply wrote professionally ! Probably a good many in the audience expected, as I did, to hear the speaker turn this case to account for the purpose of minimising the effect of Hostile press criticism. But, instead of this, Mr. Wrigfht, t\o the surprise anl consternation of several. of those who occupied seats on the platform, pointed out, with an air of triumph, that the position of the teachers would be similar to that of this editor — they would teach the Bible lesson PROFESSIONALLY, although they might not believe what they taught, any more than the editor believed what he wrote ! After the meeting I expressed in strong terms to two of the ministers my opinion of suoh teaching, and both were candid enough to admit that it was " very bad indeed." Ore of tnem expressed his intention of pointing out to the organiser his mistake, so that he should not repeat

it. It matters little whether the organiser repeats his argument or not, for the serious thing is that a movement whose object is supposed to be the elevation of tlhe moral and religious tone of the community, should 'be entrusted to a man so lacking in moral sensibility as to be utterly unconscious of the real drift of his teaching, for I gather from the reports of pre\ious meetings that he must have taken the same line before. ' Insincerity,' continues the same writer, 'is the bane of our politics ; it is not unknown in our pulpite ; . . . ani now it is to be introduced into our schoo's! Introduced in the name of morality and religion ! '