NOT COMPULSORY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 78, 2 April 1932, Page 11

NOT COMPULSORY.

BIBLE INSTRUCTION. DECISION AT OXFORD. By 127 votes to 108 Congregation at Oxford rejected, an amendment which, proposed that Holy Scripture should be ; made a compulsory subject at Respon- \ sions. The Sheldonian Theatre was 1 crowded for the debate. Following the ' abolition of "Divvers" from the Uni- > versity curriculum last term, a statute ! was promulgated that Scripture should I •be an optional subject at Responsions ; I (entrance examination to the Uni- ! versity). Twenty-five amendments to ; ; this were tabled. Canon M. P. Williams (Christ Church) - ; said the whole matter rested on the ' first amendment. If this was not passed ' the rest would lapse. It had been the traditional policy of the University, he said, that all candidates should possess some elementary knowledge connected with the Christian religion. Owing to fft the University's position at the apex of the educational system of England, they • were bound to fortify the 6trata of education below the University level. "In the past great regard lias been paid to the man who leaves this University, which has endeavoured to turn out the best type of Englishman, what-* is known as the scholar and a gentle- ;; man. They have ibeen looked up to as .> leaders, and it has been the object of •?' this University to produce successful i'. persons properly qualified for the eer- :•! vice of God and State." "! "Groundless Alarm." By its educational requirement the ~• University exercised a profound infill-',', ence on schools. It was impossible to 'J exaggerate the momentousness of the J J issue before them. Mr. G. Ryle '(Christ Church), who opposed the amendment, said many • schools would be highly reluctant to 3° cater for. coaching in this compulsory.;;! Divinity subject. This reluctance might;*,! easily result in a boy being left to'jjf teach himself. "I am not sure," he said, "that it is-' 1 * one of our functions to coerce schools in the lines of a curriculum which they are not desirous of adopting. I am not sure ™ * even that we have the power to do so." ". It was quite clear to him that the*!!! alarm which some members of the Uni- ':;! versity felt, that the abolition of a Scripture examination at the University ;; would result in schools paying less ; attention to the teaching of Scripture, was entirely groundless. Schools had «> read, and would continue to read. Scripture, no matter what the University did.