WESLEYAN CHURCH.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XII, Issue 3931, 6 October 1891, Page 2

WESLEYAN CHURCH.

Owrht the State to Teach Christian Morals la the Day Schools ?

(An address delivered at the Masterton Wesleyan Chursh on October 4th, by the REy. J. Dukes).

Education is so manifestly income plete without the inculcation of good morals, that very few will have the temerity to deny it. For any man to attempt to divorce morality from education, would immediately bring his own mental and moral status under the gravest suspicion. As a people we are practically unanimous on that point. Much as we deplore the low state of morals, yet we are thankful to know that the moral sense is sufficiently high, as not to tolerate an educational system which ignores the common duties we, as citizens, owe to each other in the various relationships of life. But the question for our consideration this evening is not, " Ought the State to teach common morals ?" but " Ought the State to teach Christian morals in the schools ?" The thoughtful man will see that the qualifying word opens out to ua a new world of ideas, aims, examples, and motives, I take common morals to apply to and cover our duties to each other, in the various social relationships of life ; upon all these, unquestionably, should be set the seal and sanction of God. But Christian morals bear on our religious life, the thoughts we have of God, our sense of dependence upon Him, the duties we owe to Him, the reverence and love which are due to Him.

The teaching of morality, without the sanction and weight of the name and authority of God, has many a time been tried, and as many times failed, because as we shall afterwards attempt to prove, the system which would promote the growth of morals from the merely human, and comparatively sordid view, of which Bentham was one of the chief exponents, viz., " that the ethical science is the art of directing the actions of men in such a manner as to produce the greatest happiness," is very defective and unworthy of man, " made a little lower than the angels." We adversely criticise the present system of education, because it does not go far enough, it finds all its motives here below, and it simply addresses the basilar faculties of a child's nature. In its faulty utilitarianism, it retrospects to pagan Greece and Rome. Far be it from me, however, to stigmatise it as immoral, it is not immmoral, on the contrary it is conceded that there is much of moral teaching imported, the good effects ot which, howevar, are largely neutralised by the studious exslusion of the name of the Divine law-giver from the school. Until Christian morals are taught from the fountain head, until the pure river of the water of life flows into and cleanses the whole routine of school life the educational system will be woefully, and in a professedly Christian State shamefully defective. Is not the system of morals taught in the public schools good? asks the secularist. Yes, as far as it goes; but bow far does it go ? Listen to Beecher! " Isn't my cable as good as yours, as far as its goes ?" says the sailor who has a short cable, to hint who has a long one. " Yes," says the other," as far as it goes, but what of that when it won't go within 50 fathoms of bottom," and what is the use of a system of morals when it neither goes high enough to reach the great Law giver on His throne, nor low enough to touth the child in all the deep, hollow, necessities of his being. If you want to inspire in the mind of a child a respect for ethical laws, and to awaken obedience, you must teach the solemn truth that the Divine Being is at the back of them, and that they derive all their essence and authority from Him. To the question then before us we must give a decided affirmative ; because (1) If it is the duty of tin State to educate at ail—upon which we all agree—then the State cannot with impunity neglect the important matter of inculcating Christian morals On a matter of such moment we hesitate not at repeating ourselves, viz., that without the religious element education is sadly defective and incomplete. If, therefore, the State, or rather the Government, for on this question I venture to say that the Government does not represent the State ; but if the Government supposes that the boy or girl who passes through the public schools, without being taught his or her duty to God, is educationally fitted for the battle of life, at least three fourths of the people in this colony consider that their moral instincts are not only outraged, but their common sense insulted. For can it be said that the mere acquisition of learning, without moral culture, is an unmixed good ? Is it not like a two edged sword which cuts both ways ? Guided and governed by iho wisdom which I cometh from above, it is rich in blessing, but without this Divine association, the mere enlightenment of the intellect will only open the eyes of a greater villainy. From whence comes the huge embezzlements and gigantic frauds, the false representations of commercial enterprise -now, as a buyer untruthfully depreciating stock, and now, as a seller scandalously inflating and elevating it—degrading the stock exchange to the level of the gambling housi? Whence the fraudulent bankrupts which, thanks to facilitating clauses in our bankruptcy laws, puts a man, at the expense of his creditors, on his feet, or rather in a buggy, while unsophisticated minds wonder how he can do it ? Whence come nearly all these but from educated scoundrehsm. Education is not what some maintain the end of life, it is only the means to an end—the only true end of life is to glorify God.

There is sadly too much truth in Montaigne's satire on modern education. "The object which it aims at is not to make us good, and wise, but learned; in that it has succeeded. It has not taught us to follow and embrace wisdom and prudence, but it has imprinted on our minds the derivation and etymology of these words. We know how to decline virtue; we know how tc love it. If we do not know what prudence is in its real essence and by experience, we are, at all events, able to spell and pronounce it," But are the duties of the State discharged, when it gives to the child the shell, and denies it the kernel ? or, when it asks for bread, to give it a atone? We think not. (2.) The State is bound to teach Christian morals, because they are the basis of national greatness. There are three nations on earth conspicuous for prosperity and stability. I mean England, the United States, and Germany, and these three are equally conspicuous for the tuition of Christian morals. It is instructive to us, in this connection, to notice the stand taken by these three great Protestant powers, in reference to

this question, in England the educational system has neyer been purely secular; two things have prevented it, (1) The existence of denominational schools receiving grants from the State, which we should be very sorry to see introduced here. (2) The moral sense of the people, which did not long tolerate the exclusion of Christian morals from tbe schools. Many of the larger Board ssbocls, that loudly clamoured for the expulsion of the Bible, have been very glad to restore it, in the shape of selected readings therefrom. If any man is qualified to judge of a Federated Australasia now, ami when it carries one hundred millions of people, it is Bishop Moorhouse, he brings to bear on any subject one of the clearest and mightiest intellects of the day. His words are very weighty, When speaking of the mere', ly learned man, he says, "Without religious hopes to open out to him the broad horizon of a higher life, and a future world, he will try to feed his soul on the swine husks ot sensual pleasure. He will become effeminate, idle, luxurious, and cruelly selfish, and a centre of moral contagion to his neighbours. A nation of such men could not hold together beyond the second or third generation." (3) On the plea of consistency the State is bound to teach Christian morals in the schools. If the State does not appoint, it nevertheless approves of the appointment of chaplains, Scripture readers, <fcc in our prisons, asylums, hospitals and refuges, for the spiritual benefit of the vicious and unfortunate. Let it not be thought for a moment that this is objectod to; but surely by the plain, common-sense maxim that " prevention is better than cure," it is also the duty of the State to religiously instruct the young. All sound moral ethics, sanitary science, medical science and practice, and judical inflictions are based upon the deterrent principle. It is not only "looking backward," but going backward, to neglect the child to attend to the man, for what the child is the man will almost invariably be. This is so apparent to eyery moral reformer that, in his opinion, the summit of inconsistency is about reached, when the State says to the instructor of youth: "Now, not a word, Mr Schoolmaster, in your teaching about God, about the reverence and worship due to Him, about His claims upon heart and life, about personal re' sponsibility to Him as Law-giver and Judge. Not a word about all that. It will be time to religiously instruct, when be arrives at manhood and commits a felony, when he loses his reason and is taken to the asylum, or when be breaks a leg and is carried to the hospital." State secularism practically says that, concerning thousands of children in this colony, who are utterly desti- > tute of religious training in the home, and whom the churches cannot reach through the agency of Sunday schools, i and J say it is grossly inconsistent, aye and comparatively useless, for the State to trouble itself about the spiritual well-being of criminals, i paupers and idiots, while it neglects i the children. If you want to cut |off 1 the supply, the steadily increasing I supply to our gaols and asylums, i inculcate Christian morals in the schools. In proof of this, and a a , further proof of the sound morality promoted by Old Testament scrip- ; tures, recent prison statistics in England show that there are only 23 Jewish convicts throughout the country, as all are sent to Fortsea, where a snull synagogue has been ; erected. We deduce two important truths from that statement: (1) We see that a religious education is the most powerful deterrent upon crime; i (2) that on the accepted axiom, that a corrupt tree cannot bring forth good ; fruit, we conclude that the good results amongst the Jews point coni clusively to the fact that the Bible is a good book, i If it commends itself to tha judgment of all that it is the duty of the State to punish certain infractions of , the moral law, upon which all our ; laws are based, surely it becomes a : State duty to teach every child that moral law in order to become a right worthy citizen. For to fear God and keep His commandments is the whole duty ot mau. But let it not be supposed that the recognition and faith> ful discharge of this duty by the State would relieve the most natural and divinely designed instructors of a solemn ana important trust. I mean the fathers and mothers of children. The duties can never be relegated to the State or to the Church. Oh, let us esteem it, as indeed it is, the greatest honour that high Heaven can possibly confer upon us; aye, and may we not say the most weighty responsibility, viz, that of presenting to their young and tender minds the most glorious truths that ever fell on man or angel ears. While we are glad of the assistance of Church and Stale in the religious education of our children, let us tenaciously bold it as our inalienable birth-right and high prerogative to teach them the way of the Lord. All this will, of course, involve our personal surrender to God, a close and consistent walk with Him, evidenced in a growing conformity to Him, and a steady growth in Divine Knowledge.