BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8350, 10 February 1913, Page 11

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

ADDRESS BY PROFESSOR AIACKENZIE. CANON GARLAND’S ARGUMENTS TRAVERSED. Professor H. Alackenzio delivered an address at the Unitarian Church last evening concerning the Bible-m-schools question, and "what ho termed “ Canon Garland’s specious arguments in regard to tho matter.” At the outset tho professor made it quite clear that ho entertained no hostility to religion or to tho Bible. On the contrary, he said it was becoming more and more recognised that religion was indispensable, and that people, as intelligent beings, cannot escape from tho problems emerging from religion. There could be no doubt that more liberal, enlightened, and rational views as to the nature and claims of religion obtain in educated communities tiian oyer before. However, there were serious and insurmountable differences of opinion as to tho relation of religion to what is called the Bible. There were religion and morality long before the Bible existed. RELIGION AND AIORALS. There was no disputing tho fact that tho Bible contained much that was of tho greatest value and importance m relation to religion and morals, and ho would go so far as to admit that it was very unfortunate that it cannot bo more freely and frequently drawn upon in this connection for tho education of the young. But tho hopeless diversity of opinion among ecolesiatics made it impossible to use that Bible in State schools without causing gross injustice to very considerable minorities if not majorities. The movement was really a clerical one, and there was no evidence that tho present system had proved a failure. The State was under no obligation to furnish a ‘ ‘ complete ’ ’ education in the State schools. As a matter of fact, it had, as it was, to exclude many subjects a knowledge of which would be both useful and desirable. After referring, to State or official churches, the professor went on to deni with the conflict between religious dogma and modern knowledge. The churches that were afraid of modern knowledge and. modern science had, ho said, better close their doors. The fault was that tho churches had committed themselves to stereotyped creeds. They were in bondage. But the teacher lived in a different world, unfettered and unbound. His commonsense and knowledge could be freely drawn on, but this was not so in the case of the vast majority of the clergy, who had committed themselves at a very early age to dogmas that left them no longer free agents. It was in effect a conflict between religious dogma and modern, science. The „ Bible-in-schools movement was what might be "called an incident in tho conflict. The conflict of parties in the churches made the work of the Bible in-sohocls League all tho more difficult. Diversity of opinion existed among the clergy even as to the essentials of religion itself. They should bo unanimous, and make quite clear what they meant by Bible-reading. “A PIG IN A POKE.” To accept a text book prepared by .the Education Department was like buying a pig in a poke. The State, he contended, was doing quite enough in making provision for the clergy of the various denominations to impart to such State schoo children as voluntarily take advantage of it religious instruction before or after the hours ordinarily allocated to. secular work. Professor Mackenzie then referred to a new malady which had recently broken out among them, which he termed “Garlanditis,” tho symptoms of which were specious argument, misleading statement, and (as it was vulgarly called) bluff. He cited a large number of statements attributed by the press to Canon Garland, whoso public utterances abounded in what logicians called “argumentnm ad hominem” and “sugfestio falsi.” From inquiries made by 'rofessor Mackenzie during the past few months he was satisfied that an overwhelming majority of the teachers in tho Dominion were against the Bible-in-Schools’ League, the vote of 33 to 7 at the meeting of the Education Institute placing it beyond dispute. The seven, merely voted for a referendum. Tho inspectors, though they sat low, were almost to a man against tho league’s objective, and nearly 90 per cent, of the members of the university college staffs were against imposing this task on State school teachers, while the 10 per cent, or so who would like to see the Bible in schools would vote for “concurrent endowment” and a "grant to Catholics'.” “A STRANGE CONGLOMERATION.” The retiring president (tbo Rev. IVReady) of the Methodist Conference, an evening or two ago, represented tho opponents of the movement as. a strange conglomeration and combination of Roman Catholics, secularists, many teachers in the day schools, sundry members and friends of the Protesant churches, and ho (Air Ready) had added, the last to show its hand was tho liquor ring. Professor Alackenzio said ho could not conceive wha* ho meant by tho liquor ring. He (the speaker) would challenge Canon Garland to find a single recognised authority on ethics who accepted tho view that tho Bible was tho basis or foundation of morals. Canon Garland and the of his league .had again and again represented tho Bible as tho best handbook on morals that could bo put into tho hands of tho young, and yet they gave them to understand that it was not the Bible but a severely expurgated version of selections from. it that they wanted for schools. Again, Canon Garland maintained that tho words in the Education Act “that teaching shall be of an entirely secular character” forbade all reference m schools to God or Jesus or Christianity, while it permitted reference to nonChristian religion—in other words “secular” to Canon Garland was a synonym for “non-Christian.” It would shortly bo tho duty of the defence leagues to draw the attention of the Government to the methods by which signatures were obtained to some of the pledge cards. Alost of Canon Garland's friends, too, lost no onnnrtnnity of representing their Protestant opponents as secularists. This was a gross misrepresentation. i