BIBLE IN STATE SCHOOLS.

King Country Chronicle, Volume VIII, Issue 679, 20 June 1914, Page 6

BIBLE IN STATE SCHOOLS.

[published by arrangement.]

NE$ ZEALAND LEAGUE. What is the Bible innate Schools League?— The League ,1? a Uuion entered into by the. Church of England, 41 per ; cent; Presbyterian Church, 23 percent; and the Salvation Army, 1 per -cent; in all 74 per cent, "of the population. In addition, many' Baptists, Congregationalistß, Lutherans and mebmers of the Church of Christ are members of the League. What is the object of the League? —To restore to the National system of Education the Bible and its teaching by a method, known as the Australian system, which has existed in New South Wales since 1866, in Tasmania Bince 1886, in West Australia Bince 1893, in Norfolk Island since 1906, and in Queensland Bine? 1910 and which in thoße States has proved a bulwark of the National system, safeguarding it against any attempt todeßtroy it in favour- of denominational education. The fact of its permanence in two States for nearly half a century and since its introduction in adjoining States is proof that it gives satisfaction to the vast majority of the people. What is the League's Proposal?— Lessons read in school hours by the children themselves from Scripture book provided by the Education Department; State School teachers supervising the reading, but not giving sectarian or dogmatic teach- j ing; Visits during school hourß by ministers or accredited teachers from the chutcheß, instructing the children in the faith of their fathers; conscience clause by which the parent has cournlete control of the child's religious instruction in the public school. The League is not asking for every detail of the system, but for the principle that every child shall have the right to read the Bible and have the opportunity of definite religious teaching by his own church, both in school hours, the parent—not the teacher or church—to decide how much, if any, religious instruction the child shall have. As the details in applying this principle vary in the Australian States, so they can be varied in New Zealand to fit local conditions. Why is a Referendum Sought?— Because in a Referendum every opponent will have an equal opportunity with supporters of a direct vote. The subject ia one which is of immediate concern to every parent, and of hardly less concern to every voter. It is a question which can be settled best by a Referendum inasmuch as members of Parliament would be affected by a number of other issues having no concern with the question of religious instruction. Direct settlement at tne ballot box of this question allows it to be decided on its own merits without any other question becoming involved. The precedents of the settlement of the qu.'stion by Referendum are numerous; Switzerland—the home of the Referendum—South Australia, Victoria, and Queensland having regarded it as the most 1 suitable way of ascertaining the Will of the people on the matter. The question Bible or no Bible; religious instruction or no religious instruction, is distinct from political and party issues. ,4 Why Should I Support the League's Proposal ? Because the churches representing the vaßt majority of the people have come to an agreement in the common interests of the children, and a great proportion of the electors have endorsed the action of those churches by signing individually their agreement with the proposal. Plainly, therefore, the League's proposal is the only' one likely to be acceptable to the majority 6f tne people of the Dominion. Whhy Should. There be Religious Instruction in" State Schools?— Because education is not complete which does not make provision for the. teaching of morality, and morality cannot be taught without a religious foundation. The religious ipundation for a Christian country ia found in the Bible. Why Should the State School System Include Religious Teaching?— There is no more reaaon why the State shbld exclude Bible lessons and ministerß' visits from the State Schools than frum our Industrial, our hospitals and our prisons, where, the State allows religious instruction to be given. The State recognises the Christian religion in every important phase ot its life from the Xing and the Governor, down through''Parliament, With the Judges, in the making of laws, in the celebration of marriage, in the Defence Force, and in the gaolß—it is excluded from the primary Bchools only. Will the Bible be an Innovation in ttie Schools?— Not so. It had its place in the provisional systems of

education up to 1877. Provision for Bible reading and prayer wbb made by Mr Bowen, Minister of Education, in his National Bill in 1877, when tha provinces were abolished, but the clause was' struck out against Mr Bowen's wish, without any direct consultation of the people. .. Only in New Zealand and two other English-speak-ing States in the Empire is the Bible excluded from the primary schols. The innovation is the exclusion of the Bible from the curriculum. Our schools are..thus non-Christian, antinational and anti-British. ■ We want this blot removed and the Bible restored.

Is the Bible a Necessary Part of Education—Yes, certainly, if we purport to give the children an education in English. How can they understand the history of their race or their literature, without a knowledge, if only from a literary point of view of that Book, without which the history of England could not be "written; and without which her literature, her poets, her historians, her Acts of Parliament, her great writers and even her newspapers to-day would be unintelligible? Is it True that the League Proposes Mutilating the Bible?— Certainly not. The same principle is followed out in every cnurch of selecting the moat suitable passages of Holy Scripture for public use. The Roman Catholic Church itself shows a clear example in this respect.using choice portions of Scripture for reading at Mass, and similarly selecting portions to be read daily by its clergy. The charge of mutilation of the Scriptures brought against the League could equally be brought against every church, and the Roman Catholic church in particular. Is the State leacher to be Asked to Teash Religion?— Only in the Sense in which he is teaching it now. The official syllabus of 1912,. page 48, specifies in nearly 100 particulars the moral duties of life. These are to be taught by examples taken from history, biography, poetry, fiction and by anecdote, allegory and fable. The -League's proposal would add the Bible to the curriculum. Teachers are asked to treat the Bible lessons in the same way as they treat other historical or literary lesBon; and as they already do with lessons on Mohamet, Confucius end casual references to the Christian religion and the Bible, which appear in the school literature. For tens of years thousands, of teachers have been giving Bible lessons to tens of thousands of children in Australian States. Not one case has been on record of any teacher raising difficulties about theße lessons; even when as in the case of Western Australia.Norfolk Island and Queensland,the system was introduced after the education system had been in existence for some years. It is incredible that the teachers of New-Zealand would find difficulties where their colleagues do nut. Are Teachers Unfit to Give Bible Lessons?— This charge is made by opponents of the League. On the ether hand the. League is prepared fully to trust the teachers of New Zealand as worthy of the same confidence' as the teachers of New South Wales, Tasmania, Western Australia. Norfolk Island'and Queensland, where no such Charge of unfitness is ever heard of. Will This System be Unjust to Roman Catholics?—lt would ba unjust if the proposal denied them the same opportunities as any other church. Roman Cathholic priests and other accredited teachers will have the same right as any other church of going into the schools and teaching their own children school hours In New South Wafes an average of 1000 visits a year by them is a proof that they '•an avail themselves of the opportunity. In New South Wales the Education Department reports that the number of children withdraw from the Bible lessons under the State School teachers is so small as to be negligible for statistical purposes, consequently it follows that parents of 31,940 Roman Catholic children in the State schools find no difficulty in their children reading the Bible lessons. There can be no injustice in offering the Roman Catholic parents in New Zealand that of which Roman Catholic parents elsewhere avail themselves.

Will the League's Proposal Lead to State Aid to Denominational Schools? —It will not, because the Roman Catholic Church—which demands State aid both where there is no religious instruction and also where it exists—is effectually prevented in the latter caae from forming with any other church a combination, which could obtain State aid. Practically all the churches save, the one desiring Stats aid are so satisfied with the system of religious instruction which the League advocates that they have definitely dropped the pi.licy of State aid for their schools; preferring to:suppori the national system of education when it includes the system advocated by

the League. That the clergy of every denomination, including the Roman Catholics, will have the right of entry into the State schools for the purpose of giving religous instruction to their own children leaves no just ground of complaint, inaamch as the responsibility of refusing to teach children ließ with the church that declines, not with the State. It then cannot legally be pleaded that the children are brought up without religious instruction, as is now /urged by the Roman Catholic church which claims with all its strength State aid under the present secular system. 3 Who Owns the State Schools?— The people of New Zealand, who pay for them. Therefore the people have the right to say what shall be taught in ths people's schools. The Referendum will allow the people to be master in their own house.