Evening Post. MONDAY, MAY 7, 1028. RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 106, 7 May 1928, Page 8

Evening Post. MONDAY, MAY 7, 1028. RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION

♦ After the lapse of six months since the rejection of the Religious Exercises in Schools Bill by the House of Representatives some evidence is forthcoming that the long silence of the defeated party is not to be construed as having given consent. Yesterday was made a sort of field-day by the Bible-in-Schools League, and all the pulpit artillery that they could command was turned on in support of the Bill. As evidence of popular opinion the demonstration did not amount to much, for the duly of a congregation on these occasions is not to debate but to listen., and in the absence of any critical examination the high ideals and excellent intentions of the promoters of the measure make the defence of their case on general principles before the adherents of any of the denominations that are not prejudiced by the proposal a very simple matter. It is also to he noted that between now and the opening of the Parliamentary Session the agitation will be transferred from the pulpit to the platform. As we reported on Saturday, the Bible-in-Schools League proposes to hold in the main centres of population during the next six or seven weeks "a large number of public demonstrations of citizens and parents." At the most this campaign will be a very tame affair in comparison with the tremendous agitation which on the eve of the Session of 1914 was scaring Ministers and members of Parliament, but after a great fight before the Education Committee of the House collapsed completely at the General Election at the end of the year. It is perhaps still more to the point that the agitation now proposed will be a very mild affair in comparison with what was threatened immediately after the Bible-in-Schools League suffered its last defeat. Tn 1926 the Religious Exercises in Schools Bill passed every stage but one in the Legislative Council, but fell unexpectedly at the very last ditch. Last year the struggle was transferred to the House, and there it was knocked out on the first division. Had the vote been taken a few weeks earlier the decision would probably have gone the other way. But another long fight before the Education Committee had focussed public attention on the issue and opened the eyes of members unfamiliar with previous stages of the controversy to things which they had been unable to see while the agitation was mostly in support of the measure. The pledges which, according to the confident statements of the Bible-in-Schools League made a decisive majority for the Bill a certainty if it was allowed to go to a division proved to be as useless when the pinch came as those signed cards which in 1914 were supposed to represent the views of a majority of the electors. It was on that account that the rejection of the measure after all these years of mostly unopposed effort made an impression on Parliament and the public which was out of proportion to the size of the majority. In the face of this unforeseen and significant defeat it was clearly incumbent on the promoters of the Bill to show by prompt and vigorous action that they were not prepared to take it lying down. This obligation was evidently recognised by the Rev. John Paterson, of Wanganui, when about a month later he presented to the Presbyterian General Assembly at Christchurch the report of its Bible-in-Schools Committee. He sounded a call to arms in words which are worth recalling:— For many years past those who had conducted the campaign in New Zealand had refrained to their utmost from stirring up strife in the community, but to-day the situation had changed. Their opponents, led by Bishop Cleary, had used every means of defeating them, and had villified them on every occasion. The time had now arrived to tako the gloves off. A stirring campaign from end to end of the Dominion would bo launched, because their opponents were loud-mouthed and full of abuso. They had been given consideration by Parliament out of all proportion to their numbers. How much of this campaign which was to stir the Dominion from end to end has been heard during the last six months? Nobody has been stirred because nobody has had a chance. The great campaign has not been launched. Though the gloves were due to be taken off six months ago they are not off yet, and those opponents so "loud-mouthed and full of abuse" have neither been hurt nor scared. Whether the campaign which was announced on Saturday will comply with the specifications of the Rev. Mr. Paterson's brave talk we very much doubt. If the rejection of the Religious Exercises in Schools Bill had really filled the Protestant Churches with indignation, if they had really been as Archbishop Averill suggested in his address to the Anglican General Synod, of "one heart and mind, on the matter, the expression of their united indignation could not have been withheld so long. But despite the long delay and despite the probability that there will

be no such display of vigour beIwecn now and the opening of llie Session as to disguise the significance of this delay, it will be well for the supporters of the secular principle not to take too much for granted. They are in an infinitely belter position now than they were twelve months ago, but a relaxing of that "eternal vigilance" which is the price of liberty might easily reverse the surprise victory of last Session. There is one important point to which both the supporters and the opponents of the Isitt Bill should be able to agree in paying attention, and that is the using and the widening of the present opportunities for religious instruction in the State schools on a voluntary basis. Referring to lhe % speech of the Rev. Mr. Paterson from which we have quoted, we wrote at the time:— It is not more hard hitting that is needed, but more hard work. If instead of taking the gloves off the promoters of the Bill would take off their coats and work for the Nelson system, they would serve tho interests of religion far better than by intensifying the bitterness of a vain political agitation. Much faithful work continues to be done under the Nelson system, but instead of increasing it the inevitable tendency of this political agitation is not to increase but to diminish the.amount of this voluntary work. In order to improve the chances of the Bjll its supporters are constantly disparaging the Nelson system instead of working it to the furthest extent that the present conditions allow. And how much have the opponents of the Bill done during the last six months for the improvement of those conditions? As the ground on which the Bill was rejected was that the development of the Nelson system was the line that reform should take, prompt action should be taken to refute the taunt that this plea was a mere subterfuge. The apparent inability of the Government to see that it has any responsibilities in the matter leaves it for Mr. Atmore and his friends to endeavour to make good the promise implied in the motion that killed the Bill.