SECULAR EDUCATION.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 4964, 19 February 1877, Page 3

SECULAR EDUCATION.

TO THE EDITOR OP THE HEW ZEALAND TIMES. Sib, —I have just seen a letter signed “ Observer” in the Times which, I think, deserves some notice. I may state that lam a teacher of twenty years standing, and have had considerable experience of denominational schools. It is asserted that religious instruction to the young is of great importance. If ' the clergy think so, why do they not take the matter in hand themselves ? If they can save souls in this way, why ask others to do this duty for them ? In' plain English, they are paid for it, and the schoolmaster is not. It is a notorious fact that the teaching power in Sunday-schools is miserably weak. Do we ever see 1 the ministers there, or do they instruct the ignorant Sunday-school teacher ? The excuse that they have not time is one that no one believes. In Victoria the denominational system had full swing for twelve years, and the evidence taken before the Royal Commission proved that although they might give religious instruction when they liked only two Protestant clergymen in the whole colony troubled their heads about it ; and even that the teachers in more than half of these schools gave none. Ail the clergy wanted was a school to call their own, and a schoolmaster to be a good servant to the Church ; his other qualifications were not thought much of in comparison with his use to the Church. If the clergy really were in earnest on this question, they could give all the necessary religious knowledge themselves. They have no authority for claiming the control of education any more than that of learning trades or professions. It is a mere piece of impertinence, a following of the claims of Rome, without the courage to say so. It has been often tried to put the hard work of the Church on the shoulders of the schoolmasters, but I would* venture to predict that were decent bonusses offered’ for giving this so-called religious instruction, it would soon be discovered that the schoolmaster was not the proper person for giving it—that deacons, &c., would soon be found.for the work. But as there is no pay the already over-worked harassed teachers should do it for nothing. It reflects little credit cn such a body as the Synod passing such a resolution, with defining religious instruction, much less pointing out how the State can pay for schools to each sect. The attitude of the Churches of England and Rome reminds me (and I say it with all due reverence for these illustrious institutions) of the wolves following a drove of buffaloes. They are unable to reach the mentally strong ; they want the children handed over to their teaching.' There can be no greater sign of weakness. We have no examples in the early ages of Christianity of a janissary religious recruiting’ system." If ministers were educated up to the scientific standard of the age there would be- no danger of genuine Christianity. The day of denominationalism is dead, and deservedly so. It is too late to ask the State to recruit’ for conflicting sects. At the same time, those Churches, such as the Presbyterian, Wesleyan, and Congregational, that claim no secular aid, but are working for their various beliefs in the way their forefathers did, deserve the credit to which their earnestness entitles them, and stand out in striking contract to those bodies who ask us to pay schoolmasters to do their work, or rather ask the schoolmaster to do it for nothing. The Times deserves the thanks of the public, and particularly the teachers, for the stand it has taken on this question. The clergy of Nelson will soon find that the day fbr manipulating local committees will be a part of the past.—l am, &c,, A Teacher.