BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 1726, 3 December 1887, Page 2

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

TO THR EDITOR.

?IR,— -A very large cumber of your ' readers will, lam sure, have been grati- 1 fiad by the way m which you li^ve treated che above Bubject thia week In your ' i oolurnns, It is of very great Importance • to a community that the newßpapar, as an expDneut of public opinion, should take Ibe ai3e of truth and right, and the thanka of your readera are due when this ia promptly and boldly done, as there would be a proportionate feeling cf disappointment were the subject ignored or despised. Yon remarked that Mr Fulton possibly erred m omoaittiug from hia taotion the words "m school hours," — bit if the worda ran " subject to a timetable and oonsoienoe olause," an I believe i they did, theo "school hours" were necessarily Implied. Aa to the new | objection now current, when others have been disposed of, namely, that irreverence would be oauaed ia the minds of the children, It seems to me to be the same aB eaylng that holding divine service m a schoolroom or public hall would lead to irreverence, and cherefore if people oannot worship m churches they should not worship at all The objection overlooks the faofc that a selection from the Bible is read m our High Sohooln daily with good effact, and the insinuation of irreversnoe Is very uncomplimentary either to the masters of our schools or to the book, "< As It is not known to apply to either, the objaotion must be generally felt to have no force. It is jast the other way round. It is the very want of the truths aDd principles presented m scripture that will lead to irreverence m the young and the deplorable fact is thtt many children □ever see it at all. It may be cause for regret that so many M.H.R.'b Bhould be so indifferent to the moral training of the young lv our State schools, seeing it is so Intimately oonneoted with the well* b-jlng of the rtate ; but It should be no oauae for despondency, The Bubjoot Ia awakening greater interest ia the country than it has done hitherto, Thousands have been signing petitions m favor of it. Bat the question remains bai Canterbury done Ita part 1 I' seeim alone to have been inaotive. Probably what ia wanted is an opportunity given to all those who aro favourable to expreßa their wish, as Borne of our legislators atill persist m saying that the wish does not •list. The following ia, I understand, the text nf tha petition to Parliament, which haa been so largely signed: •• That your petitioners while gratefully acknowledging the numerous advantages of • The Eduoation Ac, 1877 ' have yet to express their deep regret that the reading of the Bible m publio schools should be prohibited m it. Holding Christianity to be the national faith, the Bible to be its' authoritative exponent and the only standard of faith and morals, and regarding a knowledge of the Bible as an essential part of eduoation, your petitioners respectfully request your honorable Housa to make legislative provisions whereby Sohool Committees shall have powet to provide that, subjeot to a time table and a oonsolence clause, the Bible shall be read daily by the scholars m publio aohoole. And your petitioners eto." The demand Is a very easy one ; other claims can be settled on their own merits ; to say that the State has nothlog to do with it ia untrue ;It haa taken to do with It ; what is complained of is that m New Zealand an important element, the moral, haa been left out, Again thanking you for the prompt and able manner In which you have presented the eubject. I am, etc;, A Constant Beadbr, December 2ad.