THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 173, 9 December 1912, Page 4

THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

FURTHER ANTAGONISM. By Telegraph—Press Association, Timaru, Last Night, The Teachers' District Institute, dig. cussing remits from the annual confer ence, with one dissentient, supported antagonism to introducing the Bible into schools.

CAMPAIGN OF THE CHURCHES. Yesterday reference was made in most of the local churches to the proposal to introduce Bible reading in State schools.

In St. Mary's in the evening, the Vicar (Rev. A. A. Colvile) took as his text "I will consider the days of old and the years tig/pare past" (Psalm 77-5); The Bm% he said, has com* to us from the past. The .1 wisdom of our ancestors has bequeathed it to us, and we may not deny it to our sons and daughters. I know that the last thing we would wish would be to deny it to them, (but thisI do say, that by keeping the Bible out of the schools we block the main road. There are other avenues, of course. There is the Sunday school; there is home-teaching. But the main road, the surest and most efficient way in which the children can be taught the Bible is blocked. Is it not time that the main road should be opened up? You are asked to-night to give the support of your influence to the Bible-in-Schools' League. Briefly, the idea is this: The Education Department will provide scripture books Containing specially selected passages from the Bible. These will be read by the children themselves, the State school teacher supervising the reading, drawing out the moral lesson, but giving no sectarian or dogmatic teaching. This lesson will be supplemented by the Ministers from the different churches, who will act as special visiting teachers, just as some schools have visiting masters in French, German or music. I, for example, will go to the Central School at a regularly appointed time in the week, and take the children whose parents belong to the Church of England, to whom I can give direct spiritual teaching, based on the scripture lessor/ already given by the teacher. Other ministers will do the same,, the parents having the right to decide what religious teaching the child shall have, or whether he shaU have none at all. That is brieflv the aim of the Bible-in-Schools' League, I have no time to go over old ground, and anticipate and answer all possible objections. I will just touch on the point* that specially appeal to me. First, it means a definite recognition of religion ns an essential part of the education of children. It means that we recognise the importance of teaching children not only bow to get their'living but how to live. The. Bible in the schools, taught according to the plan I have sketched, means relteion in the schools, and if we are to teach morality and conduct, and manners we .must not neglect the great appeal. We must have tho driving force of religion behind our words. Many teachers feel w«.t, I know. Indeed, to put it on lower ground, for a moment—is it not almost ludicrous that this wonderful Book, full of the greatest possibilities, and containing the most compelling appeal to all that is deepest and best in human nature sho.ild be so rigorously boycotted? feome of you have read" the punished address of Mr. George Flux, the head teacher of the South Wellington ' htate School, who was so daunted when he came out to this country, and had charge of a school, because 'he was denied the privilege of kneeling down with ' the children to ask God's blessing on the days -vork, and prohibited from reading to them a chapter of the Bible In his place I should have been daunted too, but the prohibition would also have appealed to my sense of humour (the sense of humour being the faculty that ' prevents people doing absurd things, and enables them to detest absurdities around them). I should have thought to myself: "This is almost Gilbertian. ■Have I come among a people with no sense of humour who bar out from their schools the greatest literature in the I'.nglisn language, which js also the most splendid foundation on which a ife may he built, because they art' frightened of the sectarian Wv. or are fearful of hurting the susceptibili- > ties ot a small minority." There are other practical objection's, I know, but the great principle of the recognition of lion by the teaching of the Bible in the State school ;s so great a thing that if Christian, of all sects would "dose up heir ranks and fight for that principle what th; S T' ,th Wa] f Wills what the Leaguers desire, wouhl work in this country in practical operation as smoothly as it has worked in Anstra

The second point that appeals to me personally -: s tho teaching of the Bib e ' 5t fir?' 0 ' nor t],at w l>fch they hT aI \ oi 1 Gnoll « h ' antl a s regard's - the day school s - S p eakil ,„ as ° ? d child? nin ? bl °* , u SSnn t0 a '> UJld eniidicn m twenty-three minutes Let any amateur try and do thaC • i,d see St ]ie ZT U "1 ° n - Y °«cangivea, m ndd J Ms . *'* toii can't teach Moreover, I say that it i s not fair to a boy to expect him to cut short his P ky are playing cricket outside. I won'dn't have done it myself when T wala bo V Gve'the 1 WOuHn,t waited 1: trtve the power to come into school rlfV" a,read .V have broken extra' W S- ?-JF ?" rmd >' to do this 1X1,1,1 woik without extra pay lam me thepXer. aßkmg yOU to « !vft