THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS A REPLY TO CANON WILFORD.

Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 285, 28 August 1922, Page 4

THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

A REPLY TO CANON WILFORD.

CANON WILFORD’S CONSTERNATION. Sir. —Doubtless many of your readers were surprised to hear that the decisions of the recent conference on the Bible-in-sdliooli question have caused “such consternation in Christchurch.” That they have caused consternation to Canon Wilford and his followers is very evident but that in this year of grace, 1922. a large city of New Zealand, with the Grand National as a counter attraction, should have been thrown into consternation by the decisions of a committee of parsons, is something strange and. ijonderful. Canon Wilford has charged the Bishops who represented the Church of England at this conference with the betrayal of a trust imposed upon them by the General Synod. This is a grave charge and should be supportad by something more tweighty than resolutions passed by a small unofficial body of clergy in the Archdeaconry- of Christchurch. So far the present I trust the public who are interested will leave this betrayal of trust an open question. *But lest the friends of the ' bib Te-in-schools movement should place undue emphasis on this protest of Canon \V ilford 1 would ask them to remember liia position in the educational policy of the Church. . Such a. statement seems to mo justifiable since he has sought publicity in ouarters where he is mere or less a stranger.* Canon Wilford is a leader m an extreme party in our Church. TbiS party has always wanted to establish in the Church in New Zealand a system of education similar in scope to that established by the Roman Catholic Communion. At first this policy was coldlv received by the churchmen of New Zealand, but of recent years It has ceased to be a party movement and has now an accredited place in the policy of the Church. This great change was made possible by the failure of the Bible-in-schools League. The Church schools people seized their opportunity : they raised the cry that the State had shut the Word of God out of the schools and the only hope of giving our children reVgious education was to build schools of our own. Much of the enthusiasm stirred up by the Btble-m-Schools League was switched oft into this new channel. No churchman in New Zealand has been more prominent in this effort than Canon Wilford He oro-anised and inspired the socletv. Ot “Feed Mv Lambs.” and threw himself with'such energy and devotion into the work that he ha.s already sr«en opened free of debt the lai ge ’“Victory Day School”, in SC Albans. Christchurch. Tins V* convince us of Canon V ilford s since, interest in Church day schools, and his devotion in furthering them. It should now be easy to understand his constcrnat’on when the old Bible and schools movement shows signs of coming to life again. If the Bible-in-schools movement succeeds tie Church schools movement must tail; for if a reasonable system of Bi ole instruction is established in our State schools the Church schools movement will lose the support of all save the extreme cliurclimen—because the o.d war cry about the Word of God shut out from the schools must, cease, and the averse churchman will be quite content his children are taught the simple juble narrative in the day schools, and arc given instruction in ihose truths of his church which are dear to In'm. by the Sunday school tc’«'hcr and Cue parish priest. Canon Wilford threatens organised opposition to this particular, platform adopted nt the recent conference, but it is evident that wo must expect opposition from this party to any schema of Bible in schools. His insistence on the right of entry is clearly a way to wreck the whole schemg. It will never

be accepted by many of the parties concerned. If it wgro accepted what good would it b<s> in the country districts where one parson may have a dozen schools with children ranging from Primer I to Standard VI? And these the very children the churches are not reaching. Canon Wilford’s solicitude for justice to the State teacher is quite consistent. Bui tho State school teacher will probably bo a bit suspicious of joining hands with a party which threatens to wreck the Stato school system. And he is amusingly bold in his advice to our politicians: ho warns them against claims for “grants in aid” if the Bible is taught in the schools. As a matter of, fact, it would surely remove all possibility of claim for “grants in aid” : but if this scheme is rejected and the Church of England realises her policy and establishes her schools throughout New Zealand it will bo otherwise. Tho Roman Catholic Church must feel the burden of her schools; tho Church of England certainly would, and if these two combined in demands for grants in aid a political party would need to be very strong to ignore them. The Bible-in-schools system doos not ask the teacher to teach religion, but to give reverent and intelligent instruction on tho Bible narratives which must form tho foundation for all ■flue Christian teaching; on this foundation the parent, the pariah priest, can build the superstructure; on this foundation the Holy Spirit ■will build a knowledge of God in the hearts of those children of our ba-qk-blocks who to-day aro untended by the churches. Is.all our talk about reunion, hypocrisy and humbug that we arc /old it is impossible to agree on a t</;t-book of simple Bible narratives to be read by the little children of Nqw Zealand? I think not. Denominational schools such as Canon Wilford is strives: to establish belong to the era of sectarian narrowness and bitterness which we liope is passing, and this Bible-in-schools scheme comes to life again in the dawn < f a new and brighter day.— I am, etc., yy. MONAGHAN. The Vicarage, Pahiatua. St. Bartholomew’s Day, 1922.

Sir—Canon Wilford is dissatisfied, with the solution of tho Bible-in-schools problem adopted by the recent confereneo of AnglicaHi Bishops, with representatives of other denominations. He contends that the solution is not in accordance with the mind of the General Synod. He refers to the synod s resolution, but does not quote the essential part of it. The resolution asked the Bishops to confer with the heads of other Christian bodies in order to find “some method, acceptable to all parties, which will make it/possible for the State school teachers to give religious instruction to the children in school hours.” Canon Wilford holds that “acceptable to all parties means acceptable to all parties of the Anglican Church; but it is quite clear that tho words mean acceptable. to all religious bodies represented at the conference. Canon Wilford is greatly distressed because the agreement makes no provision for the “right of entry, but there is no reference to the right of entry in the synod’s resolution. It cannot reasonably be argued that the Bishops have accepted a solution which conflicts with the spirit or the letter of the resolution of the General Synod. —I am, etc., NORMAN E. BURTON. Auckland, August 24.