SECULARISM.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 2935, 7 May 1891, Page 2

SECULARISM.

TO THE lIDITOH. Sib, —Having read the letter published in last Tuesday's is«ue, written by one who signs himself "Junius Hibernicus," on " Secularism : what is it?" I am amused at the miserable way in which he treats the subject, and also the inconsistency of his own assertions. He certainly did not dive us the right definition of what secularism really is, and to imply, as he does, that secularists arc devoid of all humanitarian feelings is simply deliberately false, and, according to Ins own morality as a Christian, a wrong. Secularism is that which leads all that follow its teaching's to increase tho temporal happiness of mankind, and resist evil of every shape with unflinching defiance, whether superstitious or otherwise—in fact, it is morality without the mythical. No Chiistian regu-ds it as a moral to condone a th.?ft by giving the thief more than he has stolen, or encourage brutality by non-resistance. No, utility is too strong for the philosophy, and moulds it into conformity with the needs of society. The Christian's morality is shaped by the endeavour to secure happiness and avert terrors in the hereafter, of which he has no certain knowledge of but holds a kind of professional belief in, and is, therefore, led to do many things which decrease his temporal happiness in this life. Secularism holds fast morality, without the imaginative terrors of a future, And now for the inconsistency of my friend's remarks. I ask him, as one seeking after truth, why does he, professedly a Christian man and possessing the in-dwelling soul-renewing peace, put in front of his most important assertions the word "if ?'* Has he any doubts about "eternal things?" or has the enfeebled faith that he speaks of becomo like the writer of the leading article in last Friday's issue of the N.Z. Herald, which I would recommend my friend "Junius Hibernicus'' ta road and dicest well. To say that secularism is the embodiment of blasphemy, not even comparable with the teachings of tho Koran, is ludicrous. lAir what has the religion of the Koran done, socially, politically, or intellectually, for tho millions who follow its demobilising precepts. I venture to say that if it were possible to root out the superstitions that bind thoso pcoplo in their ignorance and shed the light of practical secularism throughout its land it would alleviate an inconceivable amount of suffering, although they think they are right just as much as the Christian does of hiß religion. As to who is richt I, of course, cannot pretend to say. If Christianity is as "Junius Hihorniens says it is, by all means give us somethine more than the chatfy arguments that were contained in thf letter above referred to, and let us have the hard foed of truth, with no doubc as to its quality. I may as well state that my criticism of " Junius Uibernicus'" letter is not biased by any ideas received from the prominent lecturer ha refers to, not having, as yet, seen or listened to tha* gentleman ; but I would recommend my friend J.H. to hear him and find out wherein the secularist seemingly proves his own arguments. Christianity is looking (and so am I) for a i champion to get up and defend its cause, and now is the opportunity for J, 11,—I atn, &c., Imtahtiai. Hamilton, litli May, 1891.