THE New Zealand THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 1909. SOME VERDICTS ON THE SECULAR SYSTEM

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XXXVII, Issue 15, 15 April 1909, Page 581

T HE New Zealand THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 1909. SOME VERDICTS ON THE SECULAR SYSTEM

fN another part of this issue we have quoted a New Zealand "Anglican contemporary's view as to the evil results likely to arise fronT a system of public instruction divorced from religion. Many pages of this publication might be filled with an anthology of extracts from moralists and educationists regarding the declension in religious faith and, practice (such as ignorance of the Bible, the great falling off in church-going, etc.) which they allege to be actual or calculable" results of the exclusion of religion from/ the public schools. Presbyteries, synods, preachers, and tlie Protestant religious press frequently make these subjects the theme of comment. In dealing with this difficult q-ueslion of evil results in the moral order, the reader will bear in mind the guiding facts and principles set forth a few weeks ago in this paper; he will take into'consideration all the contributing causes in what is often a very complex problem ; he will then, in casting up accounts, follow the line or lines "of higher suspicion or it greater probability. At the same time, he will ever remember that any system of education, deserving of the name, has, among its most sacred and elementary duties, that of curbing the lower animal nature in children and strengthening their will and moral sense against degrading influences, and that it must fairly be held accountable for the measure of its failure to rise to the level of its responsibilities as a moralising agency, both positive and preventive. It is in the light of these remarks that the reader must peruse the verdicts quoted hereunder.

Out of the rich and varied anthology of opinion which we might quote, we select three quotations referring to three countries in which the secular system has been for some time in force. ' The first quotation is from an article on ' The Moral Training Given by the Schools in New Zealand/ by the Rev. A. C. Hoggins (a Protestant clergyman), which appears in JSloral Instruction and Training in Schools: Report of an International Inquiry (1908,- vol. 11., pp. 317-8). The writer says of himself (p. 317) : * I have a fairly intimate knowledge of the public elementary schools of the province of Canterbury, New Zea 7 - land, derived from frequent visits to the schools and from annual examinations, ' during five to seven years, of some. 8000 of the scholars in religious knowledge ; I have for nine years past examined the scholars of tho (public) high schools of Christchurch in religious and ethical knowledge; I have a specially intimate acquaintance with the infant schools of the same town ; and I have, since my return to [England, spent the greater part of my time in visiting the elementary and higher elementary schools of London and the provinces.' ' Religious teaching,' he says (pp. 3178), 'is forbidden in all New Zealand schools ' ; ' moral instruction ' (not based on religion or religions teaching) ( is requireql, but is practically at- the discretion of the teaching staff ; moral training therefore, in practice depends entirely upon the personal influence of the teachers, rather than on their formal teaching. The results can hardly be said to be anything but disastroiis. . . The gradual dying out of the instinct of worship is admitted by all and. regretted by most. It is true, that the general high character of the schools is imparting an external culture and an intellectual knowledge of the higher ideals of life to their pupils; but that this, however much to be esteemed in itself, rests upon no permanent foundation, and is unable to bear tlie strain of the struggle of life, is proved inter alia by the enormous growth of every kind of gambling, and by the constant and portentous increase of sexual offences, even in very young children, which, while it certainly is not caused by the system of secular instruction, is equally certainly in no sense hindered by it.'

The following verdict, in regard to Australia, is taken from the Southern Cross (Adelaide) of March 5, 1909: ' In the current issue of the Australian Schoolmaster, Miss Mabel L. Conklin, who seems to know what she is writing about, makes a most serious indictment against these (i.e., the public) schools. She speaks of the "appalling amount of immorality" apparent among small children, especially school children, and that the cry of the school teachers is, "What can we do to stop it?" "One teacher,' 5 she says, " told me recently that last year the state of immorality in her schoolroom was such that the authorities thought seriously of discontinuing school in that room for the rest of the year. . . While parents sleep or deliberately close their eyes to these conditions teachers and purity workers are driven almost frantic by the many devices that the devil is putting forth for the destruction of our boys and girls, and the thought presents itself — Where are our morally, mentally, and physically strong men and women of the f uture to come from if this thing goes on ? The occasional teacher who buckles on the armor of courage and wades through prejudice and opposition to go to the rescue of her pupils with purity literature and personal effort is all too soon, in the majority of cases, confronted by the virtuous parents, who demand to know by what authority she presumes to destroy the innocence of their children ? Ten chances to one those innocent children know more of sin and wickedness than their parents, who, because they ' don't like to hear about such things,' deliberately close their eyes_ and ears to the conditions about them. To ignore sin is not conquering sin by any means, and silence and false modesty on the part of parents is simply aiding and abetting the Evil One in his work of destroying boys and girls." '

Our final quotation relates to the American schoolsystem. It is taken from the article 'Education' in 2'/ie Encyclopedia oj Social Reforms, edited by William D. P. Bliss, with the co-operation of many specialists (3rd cd., New York, p. 538) : ' But perhaps tlie deepest evil in our schools ijs the lack of moral teaching. Until this century moral teaching has gone principally with religious teaching. The modern divorce of Church and State, the opposition of secularists to all religious teaching, and, above all, the opposing views of Protestant, Roman Catholic, and other religious bodies, having led to the disuse of religious teaching in public schools, a lowering pf the tone and the time given to moral teaching has almost inevitably, tho not necessarily followed. The coming' of the children of ignorant emigrants into the public schools has increased the difficulty, while many of our native children have developed immorality equal to that of the foreign element. Many parents fear to send their children to public schools, and" yet it is not proven that the moral tone of most private schools is better.' — [But no evidence whatever is tendered to show that the moral tone of religiovs schools (properly so "called) is not better. The logical and common-sense presumption is that, in such schools, the moral tone is better. In every case, in a well-regulated religious school, if bad moral conditions set in, they would be short-lived.— Ed. N.Z.T.'] 'In the

month of December, 1381, a Caiifornian State Teachers' "Institute was held in San Francisco. v With scarcely a dissentient voice it was declared, that the children of our public schools were addicted to lying and dishonesty. . . A committee of Massachusetts ladies made a report declaring that the " teachers almost universally complain of the prevalence "of lying, stealing, profanity, and impurity among their children" {The School Question, pp. 97, 115)--A writer in the Atlantic for May, 1894, argues that more attention is being given to the teaching of moral purity, but says that in a large class of young -women graduates of public schools, in one of the older States, all but two confessed to hearing in their • early life in "the public schools what they could never forget, tho no words could express the longing they felt to blot it from their memory. This statement of the immorality of public schools is not to be confused' with the Roman Catholic assertions that they are " godless," tho Roman Catholics and some others connect the two propositions. . . All believe, however, that, in some better Avay than at present, morals and ethics need to be taught in public and private educational institutions, and all agree that the lack of this is among the most seriotis evils of the present time.'