The Globe. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1877.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1003, 12 September 1877, Page 2

The Globe. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1877.

Tuk Neio Zealand Church JS T eivc has an article in the current number on the Roman Catholics and the Education Bill, in which a fear is expressed that the loudness and persistency of the outcry raised by the body named may produce some effect, and that they may at length gain their point. But our contemporary points out “ that zeal for the religious instruction of children in the faith which the parents profess is not the peculiar possession of Roman Catholics, and that the Government would soon have reason to be satisfied of this if they were unwise enough to make the concession .anted at by those of our fellow subjects who render allegiance to the Bishop of Rome.” Our contemporary is very much mistaken “ if the Government would not soon find, if they yielded to the clamour of the Roman Catholics, and subsidised their schools, chat others could clamoyr as loudly persistently as tliey,” In the above retracts our contemporary furnichoti

tlie strongest possible argument against the adoption of the denominational system, of which he professes himself strongly in favor. If one denomination were granted the privilege of " imparting distinctive religious teaching," the same concession would have to be made to all, and the result would be the establishment of numerous petty denominational schools on which the public funds would be shamefully squandered. At this time of day it is unnecessary to discuss the question of whether it is the duty of the State to see to the education of the children within its borders, for the most violent opponents of the secular system admit the right of State inspection. The only question is, how can this best be done without interfering more than is absolutely necessary with the conscientious convictions of the various religious bodies. By a largo majority, here and elsewhere, the imparting of purely secular education by the State h:is been regarded as the only solution, leaving it to the religious bodies to provide the machinery for giving religious instruction. Let us see how the new Education Bill gives facilities for so doing. We do not. of course, regard the opening of schools every morning with the reading of the Lord's Prayer, and a portion of the Holy Scriptures as religious teaching. It is rather as Dr. Stuart expressed it in Duuedin the other day, a national acknowledgement of religion and its importance to civilization. It is more than likely that the section dealing with the course of instruction in the public schools will be modified in committee. As it at present stands, " school buildings may be used on days and at hours other than those used for secular instruction, and upon such terms as the committee may from time to time prescribe, subject to the approval of the Board." Religious bodies may therefore use the schools after hours, and on Saturdays, for religious instruction. Instead of declaiming against State education, the religious bodies would show more wisdom were they to set about endeavouring to get the clause we have quoted amended. In the Canterbury Ordinance any school committee may set apart either one whole day or two half school days in every week during which religious instruction may be given. In Victoria the last half hour of each day is so set apart. Mr. Bowen might be urged to grant a similar concession.

In Victoria the Bishop of Melbourne has set an example which might be followed with advantage here. Instead of wasting time in vain regrets, as to the character of the education imparted in the State schools of that colony, he has set vigorously to work, for the purpose of organising machinery to supply the want. The question for Victoria, he said, was, " Will we train our children to conform to the requirements of that righteousness which must prevail, or will we leave them untaught in moral and religious truth, and so secure their misery and our disgrace ?" Accordingly, a Church Society is to be formed, the members of which are to assist in the moral and religious education of the young. If the Society, he said, was to do the work it desired, it must do it either in the last half hour of each day, as provided by the Victorian Act, or on Saturdays and Sundays. He thought the last half-hour of each day was unsuited for imparting such instruction; nor did he think the fragments of time that were available on Sundays were equal to the importance of the work to be done. He therefore approved of Saturday. These Saturday morning classes, he proposed should be taught by ladies, and there were numbers of women in the colony, he said, with culture, leisure, health and strength, who ought to join the movement. If the Churches in this colony were as earnest as they profess, surely a somewhat similar movement might be set on foot here. It is the fault, not of the State, but of the various religious denominations, that religious teaching is excluded from the State schools. Pew people will, however, be found bold enough to assert that secular teaching is sufficient. To all " with whom morality is something more than a name, and religion a dream," it is an important question that the children of the colony should have the principles of morality and religion inculcated in their minds. The question is how can this best be done. Clearly not by declaiming against State secular education, but rather by taking advantage of every opportunity of making up these defects. If the amendments in the Bill which we have suggested, cannot be obtained, at any rate societies such as the Bishop of Melbourne proposes can be formed, and everyone capable of doing the work called on to do so. If those who are loudest in their denunciations of secular education came forward in this way, a better understanding on the matter would BOCB by i\mwl at,