A NECESSARY PART OF A SOUND EDUCATION.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1855, 15 September 1913, Page 3

A NECESSARY PART OF A SOUND EDUCATION.

Sir,—Oh, that it were possible to lift the question of "Biblo in schools" out of tho region of religious controversy! Suroly, this is really an educational question—is it obligatory to make it a religious 0110?, Can we not, in this matter, confine ourselves to facts? For who is thoro who would object to facts, as proper subjects of education? But if wo' inquiro: Is it not a fact that tho Old Testament is a collection of Jewish religious writings? Is it not a fact that Christianity sprang from Judaism? and is not the New Testament a collection of early Christian religious writings? Is it not further a fact that tho Christian religion and tlio writings of tho Old and New Testaments havo profoundly influenced tho world, its history, and literature? and will, therefore, ignorance of these facts and these writings conduco to a sound education or the reverse? May I go somewhat into detail? —Cannot a book of tho Old Testament (say I Genesis) be taught in the schools, not as being either truo or false in itself, but as representing Jewish thought? And is it not a fact that it docs represent such thought? Cannot a book of the New Testament (say, one of the Gospels) bo taught in the schools, not as necessarily* truo or false in itself, but as representing early Christian teaching? and is it not a fact that it does represent such teaching? Have not our children a right to know those,facts? In whose interest can thoy bo supprossed or ignored ? Once' moro —to touch briefly on the practical—supposing a child to ask (as children certainly would ask), "Is that true?" (e.g., that the world was made iii soven days)', what tho toachoj- has to do is to point out that tha question ii

not whether the story is truo or false, but whether this was or was not a Jewish opinion. And id it not a fact that it was? Should tho teacher go further than this, ho goes beyond his province, as-tcachcr of tho Bible, to become teacher of science', history, or what not —which, of ; course, ho has a perfect right to do, or not to do. The same thing would bo truo of religious or quasi-religious inquiries (e.g., "Did the miracles 111 tho Gospels really happen?"). Tho teacher has to make it clear to tho children that, whether true or false, these are the teachings of tho early Christians, which fact is all ho requires of them to believe. The.ro is nothing to provent the teacher going furthor than this if he chooses —and, in my opinion, no good would come of frying to hinder a tcachor expressing Ins own opinion (either for or against), but, and this is the main point, he would not be required to do so. ' Sir, where is there room in all' this for controversy? but, 'as matters now are, thoro seems 110 hope of anything but controversy—the 4 best people on ■ either side aro irreconcilably opposed: fearing either that children may be taught erroneous religious views, or that teachers may be required to teach ,what thoy do not believe. Last, but not least: May it not do seriously questioned if religion ever can bo taught? Creeds can bo taught, creeds are taught, but creeds are not religion. Yet it is, alas, just about creeds that there is always controversy! —I am, etc., B. HORACE WARD.