THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

Marlborough Express, Volume IV, Issue 209, 25 December 1869, Page 1 (Supplement)

THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

To the Editor of the Marlborough Express. Sir, —It was not xny intention to have entered into any further discussion upon the subject alluded to by Philo, who says he has no desire to see the columns of a newspaper emu, erted into a “ polemical arena,” and thus contradicts himself by saying he is “ not a little surprised” that I did not continue the discussion. I simply did as he requested me : Philo asked me to answer certain questions, which I did to the best of my ability, fairly and openly. I thought that was enough—what more did the good man want ? I gave him my view of the matter ; it was not for me to take any notice of his criticisms on my writing—that was going away from the point—and besides, Sir, I could clearly see by the way Philo played on my words, that it was quite useless to prolong a discussion when I felt, and do now feel, convinced Philo does not care so much about eliciting the truth as to support his own preconceived opinions ; and so he was obliged reluctantly to “pocket an inglorious victory,” and he is perfectly welcome to it, for if it,is a victory, it is, as he says, an “ inglorious” one. Philo says there is “utility as well as fun in having an incognito,” because it enables a man to hear how the public (and allow me to say the public is a pretty good judge) speak of him ; it enables a man, he says, “ to see himself as others see him,” and in this case a fine sight it was ; it must have given Philo anything but an exalted opinion of himself to hear himself called ‘ ‘ a fool and somethingworse,” as he says he did—fine “fun,” very edifying that ! If there is any “ utility” in such, I trust Philo will not be slow to profit by it, and if he has any respect for public opinion, to submit to their verdict; but this last emanation from his pen makes me doubt if he has profited by it, and I very much fear he will have to be sent to the hospital for incurables. He make me think of that Book again, wherein it says, “ answer a fool according to his folly”—or if he likes the meaning of the next verse better—“answer not a fool according to his folly, &c.,” also another, “ The foolishness of man preverteth his way, &c.” I am not going to enter into a long discussion now on the propriety or non-propriety of teaching the Bible. I have expressed my opinions, and all that Philo has said, or is likely to say, will not alter that opinion ; but I may tell him that Christians believe in the Bible as a whole—not a few disjointed parts from the history of the Jews. Christians teach the truth as it is expressed in the New Testament and Old. Philo knows, or should know, that much of what may be termed objectionable, is one of the proofs of the truth of the Book, inasmuch as it pourtrays human nature as it is ; it gives the failings, sins, falls, and trials of men who, like ourselves, were liable to error, failing, temptation, and sin. I can tell him that the “ fundamental truths” are all acknowledged and believed in alike by the “ hundreds of sects” christendon is unhappily split up. Their difference is not in the main truths, but, as he knows perfectly well, in minor points, that difference will always exist where freedom of thought is allowed. As to the Bible being “ thrust down people’s throats,” I for one deny ever advocating such a doctrine—it would be very cruel—it would certainly choke such folks as Philo, Philo says, ‘ ‘ so long as my children are taught sound morality, he does not care from what source the moral honey comes.” He knows very well that there is no “ moral honey” like that which he can extract from the Bible—no sounder morality. I am informed by a gentleman who has been in India, that he knows Mahomedan and Hindoo parents that allow and wish their children to be taught from the Christian’s Bible, because it teaches higher and sounder morality than their men books or religions, I am in all this

simply defending the bible on the ground of its superior moral teaching, not touching on its other infinite and immeasurable advantages in a scriptural sense. Philo knows very Well that all his ideas of morality are obtained from the Bible ; all his groundings, all his surroundings at home, are taken from that source ; he ought to be thankful that he was born and brought up in a Christian land, where the moral precepts and truths of the Biblear einyrained in the minds of the people ; that its influence prevad.es the whole of society , from the highest to the lowest ; and the more its influence is felt and acknowledged, so much the better is that society. Let Philo go to the land of Confucius (if he has not been there), and he will not find the moral tone of society there equal to what it is in his own country. Philo then flies away to “ creeds and dogmas.” Who but he said anything about “creeds and dogmas”? Philo rambles about too much in search of arguments to support his views, not to find the truth ; if he really and truly does wish for the truth, let him ask of a higher power, if he believes in it, and He will show him, the way the truth and the life, if he asks honestly and diligently, I bslieie he will find it. Finally Philo himself gets rhapsodical and goes off in a quotation by saying, “ Oh how vain creed building is to free and cultured minds” (like ?) I am and Philo, which makes me even attempt to quote a poet, and say, “ Oh, for a forty parson’s power to chant thy praise” good pharisee. Mr. Editor, I ask your pardon for making this so long, but promise it shall be the last on the subject, and will conclude by saying : let Philo take another loaf to his wreath of victory if lie wishes, and let him be content with his incog. For my part, I hope I shall never be ashamed or afraid to put my real name to what 1 believe to be the truth. I am, &c., F. J. Litchfield. Arapton Cottage, Dec. 20, 1869.