THE EDUCATION QUESTION.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 2502, 24 July 1888, Page 3

THE EDUCATION QUESTION.

*■ TO THE EDITOR. Sin, —Before proceeding much furthe in defence of our present free secular am compulsory system of education it will b advisable to define the sense in which w employ the term secular. Some use th word to signify a sect or creed oppose to all Christian teaching. Others ngai construe the term secular as being godles and opposed alike to the Bible and it; teachings, and unfortunately for ou present excellent system of educatioi these for the most part belong to th clergy of every denomination, as well a a vast sprinkling of the laity who ar alike influenced by the teachings o their ministers as well as the aggrandise nient of their own particular sect. Fo my part J give the term secular its tru< meaning when coupled with the State This word secular which is derived fron the Latin xctuliim, an age, dors no as some suppose signify earthly ii opposition to heavenly or spiritual, but rather serves as a distinguishing appellation by which we differentiate tin things which relate to time from tliosi which have reference to eternity. Now these cannot he said in any sense to Ik opposed to the duties, the interests, the real enjoyments of time mil parallel vvitl those which man must feel and do ii order to arrive at a blessed eternity. Tc place these two words in antagonism, is unjustly to prejudice the question. Secular education then I define as that species of instruction by which man is fitted for the proper discharge of his dutj as a member of the State by which he is qualified to understand, and act upor certain principles and rules which by the common conlrut of men are conducive tc the general welfare of the State and tilt intelligence, usefulness, and comforts of its members. It makes us aeqnaintid with the objects which surround us, their properties, their uses etc., and the means of attaining temporal happiness and prosperity and avoiding social misery and individual suffering. Recollecting then that the Government is ii merely temporal institution composed of various Christian sects it has no right to teach anything else than what refers to secular alfairs. The Church in ajl its several branches being a spiritual institution is the proper source of religious instruction. The relative duties of the Church—i.e., including each several branch —and the State may from these considerations be easily deduced, for it is clearly the duty of a Democratic State to provide a secular education, and ol the Church, each sect for itself to supply that spiritual or religious knowledge which the Gospel came to super-add to the secular knowledge which man may naturally and unaided supcrnatnrally acquire. The only objection to this is the jealousy of sects, but surely it is preferable that the rising generation should be educated in part than that they should not be educated at all, and better that knowledge should be spread than that crime, superstition, vice, stupidity, quackery, and pauperism should abound. We have been repeatedly told that sueh a system as is now in force is totally impracticable in the present state of society. And does Ihe case come at last to this that from one cause and another, from the arrogance of the clergy and the untowardness of the few, the obstinacy of prejudice and the rashness of innovation, the dissensions of the friends of a beneficient design and the countenance of those who are no better than enemies, a State triumphantly boasting of having fostered the grandest educational system which colonial ingenuity lms yet produced, a system which gives to the children of the poor the s-nne education as the children of the rich, absolutely cannot prevent the baneful influence of the clergy from upsetting the only feasible system of education which a wise and benclicient Government alone can give ? If the Church cannot give that religious instruction to their respective flocks without upsetting our present system by forcing the Bible into the public schools, then let it submit with all it 3 pomp, pride, and grandeur to stand in derision and a proverb on the face of the earth. It must likewise bs borne in mind that State aided education is the only form of education which can be made compulsory, for it must be admitted that voluntary efforts, howevctf, amiable in themselves are liable to many objections. They depend upon the life, residence, patronage, or interest of certain parties ; they are subject to embarrassment from many causes, the failure of a public subscription, the withholding of a donor's grant, the fluctuations of trade, the success or non-success of the monetary affairs of a congregation, &c. Often has the private pique of a patron at the teacher, the quarrel on some trivial matter of the managing committee with the chief supporter, or the lnkewarniness of the trustees been the occasion of a school being closed for uver under our previous system. Besides voluntary exertions wil. always be most successful where wealth is most abundant and where in consequence of this they are leaet required, while tho really destitute locality ia left toV.ither in neglect or struggle on in a languishing State, disheartening to all concerned. But where a Government Education, tax is imposed there are none of those sudden and unexpected difficulties to be met, no untoward collision could leave the district destitute of the means of attitining , knowledge, and no spasmodic ell'orts of success are required. Retrenchment being the order of the day all over the colony, I do not see how the Bible in our public schools can in any way lessen the expenditure, but on the contrary it would not only increase it but likewise add to the troubles of the Education Boards, committees, and teachers. In fact all connected with the schools would be placed in difficulty of some kind or another. As the Bible in Schools question involves a great number of queries requiring proper answers, I shall reserve that question for my next fetter.— l am, etc., McGilmphbib. Qatnbridge.