DEAN FITCHETT’S CHALLENGE TO THE TEACHERS

New Zealand Tablet, 3 July 1913, Page 23

DEAN FITCHETT’S CHALLENGE TO THE TEACHERS

THE PRESIDENT OF THE INSTITUTE'S REPLY The following reply by Mr. . John Caughley, President of ; the N.Z. Educational Institute, to Dean' Pitchett's challenge to the State school teachers, appeared in the Dunedin Evening StaV of June 24: ~j:;' This article proposes to meet the following challenge, made at a public meeting in Dunedin under the v auspices of the Bible-in-Schools League: 'Let the teachers appoint two of their most intelligent and most trusted teachers and send them as a Commission to ..inquire what the state of things was in Australia, .and if they would be content to abide by the result the League would pay the expenses. ':■' „„'l. The Dean will surely admit that if we already have sufficient reliable evidence of "the state of things in Australia" to condemn the Australian scheme of religious instruction advocated here by the League, then the purpose of the challenge will be as well effected as if a Commission of teachers went to Australia for further evidence.

‘ 2. The evidence here offered should be unimpeachable, since every word of it is taken either from publications issued by the Bible-in-Schools League, from statements made by accredited advocates of the League’s policy, or from the official Year Book of Australian Governments, or from the official year books of the various churches.

3. The League’s objective, as stated on its membership pledge card, is: “The system of religious instruction in State schools prevailing in Australia. This system exists in New South Wales, in Tasmania, in Western Australia, in Norfolk Island, and in Queensland.” What, then, is “the condition of things in Australia ” with regard to this system of religious instruction?

‘ 4. It is of such a nature that, according to Dean Fitchett’s own declaration, he should not be a member of the League that supports it. The Dean says: “If the system required teachers to teach religion I would not be a member of the League.” Referring to the Acts in force in New South Wales, West Australia, and Queensland, I find that, in addition to supervising the reading of Scripture and to explaining the meaning of the words, etc., the teachers are distinctly required to give “general religious instruction.” The New South Wales Minister of Education has also said (see League pamphlet); “In cases where the teacher . . . dwells with judicious force and impressiveness upon such points of ‘religion’ and morals as these lessons, there can be no doubt whatever of the benefit accruing.” Note “points of religion.” The only thing a State teacher may not do in these lessons is to give “dogmatic or doctrinal teaching ” (see Act). From intimate knowledge I assert that not one Sunday school lesson in a hundred has any conscious inclusion of “dogmatic or doctrinal teaching.” Are the teachers in Sunday-schools not then “teaching religion”? Assuredly; and so do the State teachers in Australia, who must give “general religious teaching,” short only of dogma or doctrine, which only a simpleton would put before children. ‘5. The West Australian regulations direct that “where special religious instruction is given regularly by ministers the course of ‘ general religious instruction ’ may reasonably be less full than in schools where [note this] all the religious teaching is left to the regular teacher.” Thus, as regular visits by ministers are the exception (see below), the "general religious instruction” given by the State teacher has to be “fuller,’ ’to make up part of the instruction that would otherwise be given by the minister. Are not those teachers then “required to teach religion”? Surely the Dean must abandon the League which urges the adoption of the “system prevailing in Australia.” ‘6. More specific evidence comes from Rev. A. Don, a supporter of the League. Rev. A. Don has published notes of “ six typical lessons” which he heard

given in New South Wales by State teachers. In each lesson, as thus described, no Sunday school teacher would give more “religious teaching” than did these State school teachers, “Proofs’’ and “reasons” are given for : statements regarding the relation of God :to men. Is this not religion ? After lessons . are read, we are told “the teacher built upon the lesson.” In one lesson the teacher set out by writing up: “The whole of Paul’s life was ‘ foreordained ’ by God as a special preparation for a great special a work.” "The teacher adduced, among other proofs, Paul’s share in the murder of Stephen and Paul’s persecution of Nazarene Christians! Mr. Don concludes by saying that' “this lesson was given ‘in the manner of a first-rate Bible class teacher.’ ” Is any further proof required .to show that in Australia teachers are required to give, and do give, “religious teaching” as specific as the average Sunday school teacher gives? (6) Will Dean Fitchett abide by this evidence from his own colleagues and from Government regulations? Will he resign from the League, as he said he would - "‘7. Now, as to the working of the system in New South Wales, the greatest and almost the only claim made by the League is that there is “no friction.” Even if this were, true, it would be a mere negative result. But what do the League mean by “no friction” ? At best they mean that those churches that have secured, by State enactment and at State expense, the kind of religious instruction that suits their beliefs are not fighting over the pickings. The vehement, increasing protests of a large section of religious people who are not provided by the State with the kind .of religious instruction they can accept are callously and; selfishly, even impudently, ignored.

8. In New South Wales the Roman Catholics, for instance, outnumber the Methodists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Baptists, and Salvation Army all put together. Even according to the Dean’s basis of counting heads to determine justice, the Roman Catholics have more claim to be acceptably provided for by the State than have, the five denominations above mentioned.

‘9, The right of entry is of no more .value than an authorised Nelson system, which the Dean utterly denounces. The daily Bible instruction given in every school by State officials is utterly Protestant, as the Outlook most conclusively shows. Must the Catholics not only protest unceasingly, but also adopt the methods of militant suffragettes or of Ulster Unionists before their intense opposition to the system can be regarded as “friction”?

‘ 10. Would there not be “friction” in New Zealand if the State adopted a Bible-reading method by State teachers which could not be accepted on religious grounds by -the Anglican Church ?

11. The Roman Catholics have the largest church attendance in New South Wales. Yet the State-given, -State-supported system ,of Bible teaching is utterly opposed to their religious beliefs. Is this not evidence of “friction”? Is it a sign of satisfaction and contentment?

'l2. In New South. Wales there are about 50,000 children in denominational primary schools, owned by Roman Catholic, Anglican, Presbyterian, and Methodist Churches. Thus one in every five children is outside. State schools, compared with one in every 10 in New Zealand. Is this a sign of satisfaction with the State school religious instruction? Moral Power. ' 13. But surely the greatest test of all for a system of religious instruction is its power to influence character. Here the system fails most lamentably in New South Wales, where it has been in vogue for over 50 years. "

‘ 14. It would be difficult to find two States where all the conditions except one that affect the life and character of the people are so nearly identical as those of Victoria and New South Wales. In climate, situation, resources, development, industries, religion, and race they are almost exactly alike. Each has a- population of about one and a-quarter millions, of which over one-

third in each State is centred in a seaport capital. JBlair s History of Australia shows that both States were equally affected by convict settlements. —-During over 30 years of the convict system, what we now call Victoria was part of. New South Wales. Victoria had penal settlements, and received hundreds of convicts from Tasmania as well as from New South Wales proper. ,

15. Thus the only great factor of difference affecting the character of the two peoples is that for 50 years in Victoria, the State, while friendly towards religion, kept secular education as the only education it could justly provide for from State taxes. The religious instruction of the young was left entirely to the only divinely-appointed agency for that purpose, the Churches. On the other hand, in New South Wales religious instruction has for 50 years been largely left to the State with its formal, soulless, unspiritual, unscriptural system of official religious instruction. Let me see which system has done most for the children who have grown up under these systems. 16. First, as to positive results. Victoria has a much higher standard of church attendance, of Sunday school attendance, of Sabbath observance, and has about' double the missionary activity of New .South Wales. Victoria, with a population of about 200 000 less than that of New South Wales, has 430 more Sunday schools, 6500 more Sunday school teachers, and 63,000 more Sunday scholars than has New South Wales. These facts from official- records speak for themselves. ‘l7. Now as to criminal records, which are surely an evidence of the type of character of a community. Note clearly here that it is not stated or meant that Bible-reading in State schools has produced crime. Such a statement would not only Be ridiculous, it would be untrue and blasphemous. It is claimed, however, that • criminal records will help to show whether the Victorian system of religious instruction by the ■Churches alone has a greater guiding and restraining effect on character than has the State-provided religious instruction of New South Wales, with the inevitable deadening influence on the work of the Churches. State interference always has, and always will, rob religion of its free and essential spirit. _ [The following figures are from the latest Year Books of the Commonwealth. No special years are selected. Averages are taken for periods of from 5 to 15 latest years.] ‘ 18. New South Wales shows 50 per cent .more summary convictions in Magistrates’ Courts than does Victoria drunkenness, 230 per cent, more than Victona; Supreme Court convictions, 60 per cent, more than Victoria; divorces, under same conditions 90 per cent, more; illegitimacy,-21 per cent, more; persons m gaol per year, 45 per cent, more than Victoria In one year there were 2458 cases before the New South Wales juvenile courts. ‘l9. Can Dean Fitchett point to any factor so likely to account for these uniformly huge differences m every class of crime as the factor I point to—viz., that Victoria has used the unhampered, free, spiritual responsible activities of churches to train the character of its young people for 50 years; that the State of Victoria has kept its hands off religious instruction for which it has no call and no fitness, while on the other hand New South Wales has relied largely on the perfunctory, soulless form of circumscribed religmus instruction that can be given by State officialism ? ' jit the difference of criminal records were as enormously in , favor of New South Wales would not the Bible-in-schools advocates be hurling them at us as metho(Tof 0f t r 6 character - ding effect of their method of dealing with religious instruction? Even as . it is, many clerics repeatedly quote New Zealand crime as the direct result of our secular system. Is it not remarkable that ,in the three Australasian States —Victoria, South Australia, and New Zealand—the State rightly -leaves' religious instruction' to the Churches, these three States have the lowest records for crime in Australasia ? . When the whole religious work is undertaken by the Churches, is not the work better done, as shown by these results?

,20. If one needs further proof that State organised religious instruction is a dead thing, let Archdeacon Irvine speak. This clergyman, introducing an Anglican deputation to the . Minister of Public.lnstruction' in New South Wales, a few weeks ago, said: “Our com* mittee see the, danger of the country to a large extent becoming materialistic.” Following _ this, Mr. Hole, secretary of this Diocesan Committee, said: “For 18 years the provisions of the Act regarding religious instruction had not been carried out as was intended.’ We wish this matter dealt with, so that critics of the public school system could no longer describe these schools as * godless institutions.’ " , b Actually, we have here the admission that unless the religious instruction is carried on differently from the manner prevailing for the last 18 years critics would have grounds for, calling the “Bible in Schools and Right of Entry for Clergy system of religious instruction “godless.’’ ‘ln reply, the Minister of Education said: “I cannot promise to extend the present system. The clergy are not using their opportunities. If religious instruction were not given in the schools, the onus fell on those who had the right and had not availed themselves of it.” Here is reliable evidence of the “condition of things in Australia” under the vaunted system we are asked to introduce into New Zealand. ‘ Space is lacking for further evidence already at hand. All the above has been adduced from utterances of advocates of the system and from State and Church official records, where defects in the system are not sought and the best side is turned outwards. -If this does not- utterly condemn the system, then its advocates can take the palm for spineless and unprincipled support of any or every policy put forth in the supposed interests of religion. 21. The various points in this article have been consecutively numbered. We have surely the right to claim that Dean Fitchett shall not conveniently ignore what he would be forced to admit. We ask that the points be taken seriatim, and that for every point, the Dean indicates briefly or otherwise whether he can or cannot gainsay the point raised. When he has dealt with the above points, further evidence from Australia ■will be presented from the most unbiassed and reliable sources. r n ‘ (Note. —All the Averted commas are mine.— J.C.) }