PROFESSOR J. J. FINDLAY AND THE BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS PROPOSALS.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2150, 16 May 1914, Page 7

PROFESSOR J. J. FINDLAY AND THE BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS PROPOSALS.

Sir,—Some advocates of the unjust Eroposals of the Bible-in-Schools League avo been quoting Professor Findlay in support of their scheme. One speaker said tha-t Professor Findlay urged that religion should invade the warehouse, the factory, and the forum. Why, then, does not the League advocate tho introduction of its scheme into 'theso Departments of State? Everybody who recognises that the highest morality is true religion would accept Professor Findlay's statement.. Did tho speaker overlook the Scriptural definition of religion, true, and undefiled? Why did not the speaker continue his quotation from Professor Findlay's interesting and instructive book "The School"! , Let me completes tho paragraph on Page 111: 'And it (religion) will achieve this conquest just so far as its universal elements are exposed to children's attention with that simplicity and reverence which all men feel when they unite in submission to the unseen and tho eternal." (Tho black letters are mine.) Could the author of

this support tlio unjust sectarian proposals of the local League? Allow me to givo ii few quotations from Professor Findlay's book t<j show how dif-_ ferent his views aro from those put forward by people who have claimed his support for their unfair proposals. "Whore a separate group in a neighbourhood exists holding views ot ' re-

ligion and life quite distinct from those of the majority, and numerous enough to provide children for a school, it is an act of tyranny for the State to enforce an alien culture on the children. In any event, the pressure of the majority outside the school will exercise somo influence over the j'oung, and tho Stato has no right, simply because of its dependence on a majority vote, to stamp out the individuality of dissent, either if a dissent which adheres to old creeds or a dissent which proclaims a, new'evangel." (pp. 104 and 105.) He then goes on to advocate "separatist,., or '"denominational" schoola for

those who arc prepared to make the necessary sacrifices. "If, as many allege, the aid afforded to non-provided schools by tlio Act of 1902 is such as 'to relievo . them of their fair sharo of tho burden, then an injustice is being done, since tho State is indirectly assisting in tho promotion of special types of faith and custom." (p. 106.) "And so far as creeds aro a mattor of intellectual apprehension, the instructor must have patience and wait for tlio riper mind to grasp tho fundamental differences which sever man from man. To the ( infant all churches and all moralities' are alike, nnd when manhood comes he must mix with_ his fellow men of every type, sharing their common code of ethics." (p. 108.) 'Hence, in all communities where political and social freedom have found scope, tho sentiment on behalf of tho public school, definitely severed from ecclesiastical control and directed, wholly by State officials, finds increasing support. In such communities the churches which have broken loose from older institutions cease to seek control over tho week-day schools, and aro content to maintain a hold- over the family through voluntary effort in Sunday Schools; the cleric himself tends to becomo more of a citizen, mixing ns an equal with his felloiv-men; and it 19 found possible for sects differing widely in theological basis to unite in ethical ideals, ajid even to unite, for the limited purposes of the school, on a common basis of religious profession. Thus wo witness in Great Britain, as iii newer countries, tho wide adoption v, an i. system where the rites and ceremonies epecific to the sect aro distinguished from" what -is more universal, and this attracts tho great majority by tho evidence of tolerance and charity. It seems to answer the needs of the child just because it presents to its notice what is simple and general rather than the particular and occult." (pp. 108 and 109.) But if a. suggestion may hero be attempted, I would urge that in place of 'right of entry , ' tho parent should demand a right of substitution. For the proper venue for religious instruction is not' the public school, with the Anglican teaching one group in Room A, and the Catholic another group in Room Y; the church building, tho House of God itself, is the fit place of assembly for teaching the distinctive doctrines which the Church holds dear. And the clergyman himself is the fittest teacher, not the public school teacher who, in theso unhappy controversies, finds his allegiance divided between State and Church. It would surely not be difficult for the law to recognise 'attendance' once or more during the school week in church buildings." (p. 112.) Can any fair-minded man think that the writer of the above statements could favour the Bible-in-Schools scheme which

(1) Demands "right of entry" for the clergy. (2) Provides no conscience clause for teachers. ' (3) Compels a minority to contribute to the cost of the teaching of tho doctrines of a majority. (4) Compels attendance on all who are not provided with a written excuse for exclusion. (5) Demands that the schools should bo frequently divided into sectarian groups.

I believe that New Zealand is going to be fortunate enough to have Professor Findlay. in our midst with other members of the British Association of Science. which' meets here in a -few months.-.ln the,meantime I trust you will publish these rather long quotations so that his real.views may. bo known to the' 2Sejf.!?JS33fen9-JBUulic.' • I trust that, at"~a~]ater "date, we may liavo the.advantage of. Professor ,Findlay'e views after lie has seen oiir system in operation.—lam, etc., THOS. H. HUNTER.Wellington, May 12; 1914.