THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 13467, 6 July 1909, Page 6

THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

The correspondent who writes to us to-day, propounding a series of questions on Bible reading in schools, demands that we shall not object to the tone of his letter, nor 6ay that he is opposed to the Bible in schools. To do so would, indeed, be quite unnecessary; both his tone and his attitude may safely he left to the judgment of his readers. In spite of his apparent interest in the matter, there is littlo in his questions that has not already been explained. He wants to know whether the education system "will he " secular if religious instruction is "introduced." . There is a suspicion of the "suggestio falsi" about the question, because if our correspondent has read anything of the ministers' proposals, he must know that thc Bißle lesson, occupying less than half an hour - a week, is not, under the Nelson system, given in school time at all. It cannot, therefore, impair tho secular character ._ the education _ystcm. Tho question whether thc instruction would ba such as would satisfy all creeds, can best be answered by pointing out that the ministers, if (permitted to conduct the Biblo lesson, would naturally make the platform of their teaching as broad as possible, because they would wish to retain the privilege. Above all, they would realise that they must avoid all suspicion of sectarianism, since not to do so would be to invite the withdrawal of the permission to carry on the lesson. The ministers would, of course, mako arrangements among themselves as to who should conduct the work. Every Christian denomination that wished to share in it would no doubt he able, to do so—in Nelson seven denominations are represented among the Bibleteachers. In any case, as has been reiterated time aftor time, the whole affair would bo absolutely optional. The School Committees need not grant the half _iour unless they choose, tho children need not attendi the lesson unless their (parent- approve, and the teachers need not be present during the lesson unless they so desire. The idea that if only a few children attended they would be persecuted by the others is childishly absurd, and the assumption that only a few would 6o attend is- not borne out by the experience of those schools where Bible lessons are already given. In these the attendance comprises the great major ity of the scholars.- All that any "parent need do if he thinks that ibis particular breed is endangered by twenty-five minutes of Bible lesson, is to tell his children not to attend the lesson—they will get just as much ordinary secular instruction as the others. The only point of any novelty that our correspondent raises is tho question of how the proposed Bible reading will affect teachers who are conscientiously opposed to it... The suggestion that it would lead to a religious test being applied to teachers is, of course, designed to alarm teachers, but there is no reason to fear that the question of a teacher's religious -"colour" would have any more effect upon his fortunes than it does now. It is well known that school committees are occasionally influenced in the choice of a teacher by a candidate's religious views, but the evil, for we admit at once that it is an evil, would not be intensified by the working of the Nelson system. In any case, so much of the power of promotion lies now in the hands of tbo Boards that school committees count for very little in the matter. Finally, we must add that to decry the value of a short Bible lesson, and at the same time to protest bitterly against it being given, seems illogical. If the Bible lesson would be so ineffective, why make such a fuss about it?