The Press.
London, England, 1856-11-15 00:00:00

THE PRESS.

mise would sink down into becoming that very
secular system which it was intended to avert.
Noticing, next, the arguments of the secularists, as
enunciated by Messrs. Bright, Cobden, and Milner
Gibson, the noble lord said he was bound to admit
thus much, that it the theorists who cry out against
the present admirable system should succeed in
overthrowing it, sooner than accept any of the per-
nicious compromises proposed by Sir J. Pakington
and Lord J. Russell—sooner than surrender for the
Church of England the right of teaching her own
creed, unmutilated end pure, wherever she teaches
at all, he, for one, would vote for the secular system.
He, however, must not be understood by this to say
that he approved it, but only that it seemed to him
less dangerous than a system of compromise. The
evil of it lay in the fact that a real, pure, secular
system, which should absolutely confine itself to the
inculcation of secular knowledge, was an impos-
sibility. If it did not teach religion it would teach
infidelity. After dwelling upon sad illustrating this
point the noble lord concluded thus :
The present system, and with it the question whether
religion shall be taught in our schools, is now on its trial.
Its enemies are numerous, and clamorous out of all pro-
portion to their number. For a long time they have held
the language as if they, and they alone, represented the
true public opinion of the day. They have treated their
opponents as a mere knot of antiquated bigots, who in
heart were indifferent to education, and they have eren
threatened us with the overthrow of the Church establish-
ment it' we continue to oppose their views. A recent de.
cision of the House of Commons has caused them to abate
their tone. That assembly—not ordinarily a very bigoted
body on questions of religion—being called on by Lord
John Russell to consider some resolutions which embodied
the views of the theorists who drew their educational in-
spirations from Germany, refused contemptuously, by a
majority of 10'2. even to look at them. Since this vote it
has become pretty apparent that for some years, probably
until the next census, the existing system will not be in-
terfered with. Now, therefore, those who support it are
on their trial before the country. If it fail now it will fail
for ever; if it succeeds now, religious teaching will be im-
pregnably established in our schools. Now, therefore, is
the time for exertion. There are periods in the history of
States and of systems when the destiny of generations
seems crowded into a few short months or years; when the
choice of exertion or neglect is a choice that once made
can never be recalled ; when the energy or the sloth, the
li erse.ty or the niggardliness of a few men during a short
period are pregnant with the weal or woe of generations and
centuries to come. Such a crisis with respect to education
is the present. On the zeal during the next four years of
all who are concerned in education throughout the land—
on the heartiness with which clergy and laity in each indi•
v &nil parish work for the great cause, will depend the final
settlement of the question whether religion is or is not to
be a primary element in the instruction of the young. My
firm belief is that the existing system will come tri-
umphantly out of the trial; that it will be shown by the
unanswerable evidence of practical success that voluntary
benevolence, aided but not fettered by the State, is the
best engine for giving to the masses that instruction which
will not only prepare them by secular teaching to fight
their way through lite, but will give them that better know-
ledge which will tit them for performing a Christian's
duties and gaining a Christian's hopes.