BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8364, 26 February 1913, Page 11

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

CANON GARLAND IN CHRISTCHURCH, Press Association. CHRISTCHURCH, February 25. A very, largo garnering oi supporters of the iiiolc-iu-acuoois uioveuieiil was field m tire iviugs iuoatre to-uigut to near addresses uy proimueut auvocates ol tue cause. The Mayor presided, and said that the present position of tile country was not satisfactory, and Uie nuiuoer of inmates oi various institutions was attributable to a iack of .biblical knowledge. Tauon Garland, organising secretary to Uie Table-ui-btato-sciioois League, said that Uie aim Uiat mgfft was to give utterance to tne conviction that tne religious' teaching or the children of New beaiaud was more important than any other subject. In political circles and in every institution the Christian faith found its right and proper place except in the State schools. That anomaly must give way. Children must receive the same treatment as that given them if they unfortunately found their way into gaol. In only two other parts of the British Umpire was there no provision made for giving Bible instruction to the children of the schools. Every man was entitled to his opinion, but unfair statements must be combated. Bishop Cleary had attributed to him the statement that he had boasted that some 32,000 Roman Catholic children were being proselytised in New South Wales. He had never said that, be cause he did not believe in proselytism, and the system left no room for that. The facts were that there the children read their lessons of their own free will_ and with their parents’ consent. Their conscience could not be violated. Cardinal Moran, who bad been even more biter against the movement than Bishop Cleary, had said that the Scripture lessons being read were but garbled extracts not worthy of Australians, but he would suggest that there should be substituted for them the four Gospels. If that was all the difficulty of Bishop Cleary, he (the speaker) would be willing to meet him more than half-way. The foregoing proved that Cardinal Moran saw no difficulty in Scripture lessons for Catholic children in State schools. The movement did not aim at destroying the national character of the educational _ system. He desired that, religious instruction should merely receive the recognition and facilities^offered in other institutions. They stood there for the principles of liberty in the national schools and the right of parents to say what their children should be taught in the people’s schools.