Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1859-06-09
The Bible in Sehnnls

Diole Ill schoois, permit me througlI te CUT
umns OF your paper, to say few worlsn re-
! ply. | beg leave to differ with the gentlman,
g b. R., as to the prohibition Of the bible in
schools The leading principles which be sets
forth against having the Bible in our schools is,
that it is an improper place to teaek it.
would ask my honorable friend if IT'D an i'm
proper place for the Bible, is it not al an i'm
proper place for our children? If OUR ildrCn,
which We are seeking to bring up in fe nur-
ture and admonition of the Lord arlt 90 to
place to acquire an education, wliclIs unfit
or improper to introduce the Bible thf we say
it is an unfit place for our children 70 n. Does
6 B. R. wish to set forth the idu TIT all Re-
ligious teachings should be kpt pom our
schools? Are We to send our children 10 places
where all that is taught in the Scriptures must
be kept back from their mind tlei it must
necessarily follow, that if Relision an1 its in
structions arc to be extirpatol rom Dir schools,
that our standard of moraiit, mustn't once be
lowered The Bible unfit loI our schools, how
revolving to the mind of evqy true Christian.
You will admit that it is fit for our iinyestiga-
ton, you will admit that tbs proper to take it
into our families, and that It is proper for us to
perusc it, yet you wish to dlusc its existence in
schools to cease. can hut cay that it is but
madness and blindness 70 set -sasth such ideas.
What plausible raasonl can be sqssiss Of
its ixtirpationg virtually none ;sand although
+" B. R" has laborcd hard to show tl.at it is an
improper place for it, yet it would seem that all
of his arguments fall directly and Immediately
back upon his own head. He raises the argu
ment, that our teachers are not competent to
teach the Scriptures, admit that in many
cases they are not 50 highly educated IN the
Scriptures as they should be, but does that nee
essarily exclude the Bible, if man Is not capa-
BILE to clearly expound the Bible, does that place
him and his family in such situation, that it
should forever remain sealed book, and that
it is an unfit place for it? Certainly, " B. R.,
according to your own arguments, the fault is
not in the " Bible" but in til, teachers
Another argument which he brings up is,
that its cxpounders differ SO much in opinion
that it produces discord and confusion in our
schools, or in his own words makes those who
are DESTROYS of its instruction to be " dissati5
fed and fussy.' Now | have had considerable
knowledge in regard to schools, and but very
few instances have ever found where its up.
holders were dissatisfied. In no case within my
travels have ever found those that appeared tc
seek to extend the knowledge of the Lord Jesus
g dissatisfied or lussy," as /" B. R" so quantity
expresses it, | have known teachers, who were
Presbyterians, keeping school where the scholars
and parents were Mcthodists and Baptists and
various other denominations, all in the same
district, and yet it was the desire of all o
these that the Bible should be used daily, thai
while the young pupils were out from undel
the parental eye, they might not forget the wore
of God, bat that it might be held in reverence
wherever their children were permitted to go.
Furthermore, " B. R" says thai" we do no
send our children to school to reptat words lik
Parrot" Does he mean to tell us, that be
cause the teacher does not give an explanation
, to every difficult passage, that it should be ex
, tirpated? have been to many schools, an
although very many Of the teachers gave n
explanations to ssss several passages, yet it VIZ
as once visible tna. the minds Of its reader
were receiving knowledge from its contents, an
although there may be difficult passages whic
would require wiser than Solom&n to explain
yet we are taught that that which concerns L
most, is so plain that even " the wayfaring ma
though fool may not err therein" Contrar
l to g B. RS" opinion | shall contend that til
Bible has proved itself to be very beneficial ic
f wherever we find teachers who have sougf
to have the Bible the guide of their scholar
they have almost invariably had better succe
than those who have not, and trust that II
day will never come when we shall have to ser
our children to places for the purpose of a
o quiring an education, where it is improper
admit the Bible, for in excluding this book v
v virtually say that it is unfit for us to pcruse
, places whore we are called upon to 60, and tn
idea at once takes off the great degree of reve
, ence which we should all give this book, ar
t causes a stigma to be passed upon the word
: Cod which will prove itself disastrous to Il
u cause of Religion. We admit this book in OF
g families, and when its fitness for our schools
S contested we feel that it is duty to raise
It voice against its extirpation. Let it remain
!, our schools and its blessings will be felt, let
= seek to inculcate into the minds of the young
v greater degree of reverence for this book, al
i we may rest assured that the seed which is he
> sown will spring up and yield an abundant ha
:, vest, youth being such precious season in Iii
.e it becomes us in every possible manner to Sc
d to have the influence of Religion brought to be
d upon their minds, and the greater efforts '
- put forth in that direction, the less likely tn
are to fall into the evils and snares of this wor
D, And contrary to g B. Rs opinion do co
y tend, that the opposition to the Bible being a
~ mitted into our schools, is opposition to
- book itself, for it cannot be denied that wht
Ii it is an improper and unfit place for the wo
II OF God to 60, that it is an unfit and improf
~ place for man to go, 2lsa, and when we take
10 to consideration the important teachings of tt
to book, let us seek to extend its truths to Q
!, children wherever they may be permitted to .
u, And never set forth for moment, the idea tt
ne it is their duty to go where it is improper
t. the admission and perusal of the word of GC
tn j. r.
~ --------------------- s.s--' -
n. HARMONY The Bradford Telegraph do
nd sym@thize with the Patriot in its warfare
u, nally we guess there are no two Democra
II papers in the State that do sympathise one W
al the other. The Telegraph says.