THURSDAY, APRIL 17, 1902. A BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS CAMPAIGN. The New Zealand TABLET

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXX, Issue 16, 17 April 1902, Page 16

THURSDAY, APRIL 17, 1902. A BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS CAMPAIGN.

The New Zealand TABLET

* To promote the cause of Religion and Justice ~by the ways of Truth and Peace.' LEO XTTT. to the N.Z. TABLET.

FEESH Bible-in~Schools Campaign, under the auspices of the Presbyterian General Assembly of New Zealand, has just been inaugurated, and elaborate preparations are being made for a vigorous and united Protestant effort in support of the movement. The programme and plan of campaign were unfolded by the Rev. Mr. Gibb, Moderator of the Assembly, at a meeting of the Presbyterian Synod of Otago and Southland held in Dunedin the other day. The assembly had, it wa3 explained, appointed a committee, with Mr. Gibb as convener, to confer with the leaders of other Churches, and to endeavor to come to an understanding and formulate a platform. Mr. Gibb and the Dunedin members of the Assembly's Committee had accordingly conferred with the leaders of other Churches and in particular with certain delegates from the Wesleyan Conference, and the result of this conference was. to quote Mr. Gibb's own words, ' the adoption of a resolution to abandon the platform for which they had been contending — namely, simple Bible-reading, with the repetition of the Lord's Prayer, and to go in for reading, with explanations by the teachers, such explanations to be wholly contained in a book to be supplied by the combined Churches.' It will thus be seen that* this latest platform is a compromise between the original demand for Bible-reading only, with the repetition of the Lord's Prayer, on the one hand, and the New South Wales system with its text-book to be explained by the teachers and definite denominational instruction once a week by the ministers, on the other. It is intended to be an advance on the demand for mere Bible-reading which was manifestly a hopelessly inadequate proposal, and at the same time to obviate the objections commonly urged against the danger of allowing the work of explaining Bible lessons to be left in the hands of the teachers by having not only the lessons but the explanations also, officially supplied by the Churches themselves.

of Selwyn College in Dunedin, and convener of the Diocesan on Bible-in-Schools, and ascertained from him that the Anglican Church in Otago was prepared to fall in heartily with the basis now proposed. And finally iie had consulted all the members of the committee of the Presbyterian Assembly not resident in Dunedin, and found that they were heartily in favour of the proposal, too. It would thus appear that the Presbyterian and the Wesleyan Church throughout New Zealand and the Anglican Church in the provinces of Wellington and Otago have officially committed themselves to the basis of the proposed platform, and their adhesion may not unreasonably be regarded as sufficient to justify a presumption that the remaining Protestant bodies will sooner or later officially follow suit.

So much for the programme. The plan of campaign was also very distinctly and fully laid down at the same meeting, and was practically agreed to. Mr. Gibb announced first of all that it was his intention, as Moderator of the General Assembly, to send through the Outlook an intimation to their ministers and congregations as to the platform and what could be done to further it, and this he has already done. Then, in order to bring into line all the other churches, meetings are to be held in all the congregations, which will be addressed by ministers of other denominations than their own. At a later stage a plebiscite on the question will probably be taken throughout the various presbyteries. It appears that the Oamaru Bible-in-Schools Committee (which consists of the members of the Oamaru Presbytery) had already agreed to take a plebiscite of the electors within the bounds of the presbytery. The promoters of this plebiscite are sanguine enough to anticipate that there will be a majority of 10 to 1 in favor of the new platform, and if the venture proves successful in Oamaru it is to be followed out in the other presbyteries. After a time, when the interest of the people has been stimulated by means of the congregational meetings, public meetings are to be arranged for in suitable centres, at which resolutions are to be adopted pledging those present to make Bible teaching in schools a liviDg question at the approaching election. As the election draws near the presbyteries and associations or groups of churches are to arrange to have a representative at every meeting held by candidates in their districts, and by the asking of suitably-framed questions and by various other means are to keep this matter well to the front. In a word Protestants are to marshal all their forces, get as near an approach as they can to an 'organised block vote,' train all their guns on the one position, and when December comes victory will be theirs.

Is the hope well-founded ? Is it really the case that the Bible-in-schools votaries aie going to carry all before them at the next election, and by a sudden coup snatch an easy victory ? We do not anticipate anything of the kind. Apart altogether from what CatLoUcs may think about it, the proposed scheme has in itself elements of weakness that that will effectually operate to prevent its success. In the first place, it does not require a great deal of penetration to see that the unity, of which Mr. Gibb made such a brave show, is a purely official unity. The clergy, no doubt, are united on the matter, but there is no corresponding unity among the laity, or if there is any unity at all it is a unity of opposition to religious teaching in the schools. On this point the clergy never have been able to carry the laity with them, and there is no reason in the world to anticipate that they will be able to do so now. The one objection that has weighed with the laity against the various schemes proposed in the past will apply with even greater force to the present proposal — the objection, namely, that it is the thin edge of the wedge of denominational ism, and must eventually lead to the granting of the Catholic demands. As the Rev. Dr. Bevan, the Victorian Congregationalisb leader, expressed it in an interview published in the Presbyterian Outlook : 4lf we have Bible-reading and Bible lessons in the schools given by the State, I do not see how we can resist the claims of our Roman Catholic fellow-citizens.' That is precisely the way in which a large portion of the non-Catholic laity will view "the position, and they will refuse to support the proposal from a fear that any concession to the Protestant demand may likewise involve a recognition of the Catholic claims in the matter of education. As the N.Z. Tablet has before

expressed it, ' Rather than see Catholics benefit even to the extent of a capitation grant, many of our Protestant fellowcoloni&ts are prepared to abide by the consequences of a system of godless instruction which, in the practically unanimous opinion of their religious leaders, is sure to work spiritual havoc among the rising generation.'

And then the Catholics, too, have something to say on this proposal. As Dr. Bevan, in the interview already referred to, remarked, 'If we satisfy the Protestant conscience in this way, we should have to satisfy the Roman Catholic conscience also,' and the Roman Catholic conscience could never by any possibility be satisfied wii,h the settlement now proposed. Cathclics object to it, m the first place, because it is essentially and emphatically a Protestant scheme. It consists of Bible lessons, selected by Protestants, from a Protestant Bible, with Protestant explanations, and Catholics very naturally object to being taxed in order to propagate a form of religion the very aim and essence of whose existence is to 'protest' against the Catholic Church. As a colonial secular paper has very aptly pat it 'Why, in the name of all that's fair, should the Roman Catholics, who provide their own religious instruction, be compelled to help in paying for the particular brand that the Anglican, Presbyterian, and Wesleyan clergy want the State to undertake and supply,' and especially when that brand happens to be diametrically opposed to Catholic teaching and belief. Again, even apart from the flagrant injustice of the thing, the principle on which the proposed scheme is based is one which Catholics could not, with any reasonableness or consistency, accept. The scheme is based on what is known as ' non-sectarian religious instruction ' ; in other works, on religion without doctrine, and thus it" has as its foundation nothing better than what has been aptly described as the residuum of all the heresies. * Religion without doctrine ' would reduce the revelation of the living God to a collection of abstract principles or a mere pious sentiment. It is a contradiction and an impossibility. It is, as a great thinker and worker once said, * like mathematics without axioms, or triangles without base or sides.'

We believe that even- amongst our own non-Catholic friends themselves those who are in earnest in the matter of religious education would soon discover the hollowness and delusiveness of the solution now pronosed. The scheme would not provide a really effective religious education, but whatever religious instruction was given would be given by the State, and would be looked upon as a part of the State's recognised duty. Both the Church and parents would then consider themselves relieved of all responsibility in the matter, the good work now done by those two agencies would be left undone, and the last state of the children would be worse than the first. The only true and lasting remedy for the trouble is a remedy based on the lines laid down in the Archbishop and Bishops' Pastoral Letter recently published in our columns. It is the remedy which has been successfully adopted in England and in Germany in connection with the general system of education in vogue in those countries. It is in force in Ireland without overthrowing or injuring the national system of education. It is in operation in Ceylon and in other British possessions without having any of the disrupting and disturbing influences which are so gravely feared from its introduction in this Colony. It is the one true statesmanlike solution, and sooner or later it will be adopted here. Our Protestant friends may clamor loudly and ever more loudly for their own particular programme, but it remains unalterably true that there will never be a fall, fair, and final settlement of this question until the principle we are battling for has been recognised.

Mr. Gibb had also a good deal to say as to the attitude of the other religious bodies towards this platform, and according to his Bhowing it would almost appear as if our Prot estant friends were really likely at last to secure what they have never been able to secure before — namely, some sort of practical unity on this question. First of all, Mr. Gibb intimated, after the platform had been formulated, the Wesleyan Conference had unanimously adopted it. Then he had had some correspondence with the Bishop of Wellington, from which it appeared that this is the platform the Bishop has been for some time advocating, and on behalf of which he had formed an influential association, representing nearly all the churches in Wellington. Mr. Gibb had further had an interview with Mr. Nbild, warden