CORRESPONDENCE

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 146, 17 December 1913, Page 10

CORRESPONDENCE

THE OUTLOOK AND THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS TO Till KDITOK. , Sir, —ln its issue of 11th November the Presbyterian organ, the Outlook, published an article by Canon Garland on the referendum on Bible-in-Schools. My short criticism, written on 15th November, was refused by the Outlook, but was not returned to me till the sth December. As the question is one of general interest, I trust you will publish the letter refused by the Outlook, and thus continue to show the more scrupulous fairness of the secular press. — I am, etc., THOS." A.' HUNTER. 6th December. The following is the letter referred to: —ln your issue of the 11th inst. Canon Garland states the case for the application of the referendum to the question of the Bible-in-Schools. I trust you will affoid me space for a very brief criticism of his arguments. (1) The referendum applies to the voting of individuals only, so the grand total of 373 resolutions of Church courts, while it makes an impressive opening, is beside the mark. The fact that 111,926 persons have signed the league* card is to the point, but it should be remembered that, in Auckland, of 8000 signatories 'of the Defence League's card, 4000 had previously signed the Bible-in-Schools card under a misapprehension. On the other hand, there are, no doubt, quite sufficient genuine signatories of the league's card to fulfil the condition of the Swiss initiative. To Switzerland let xis go then. (2) "The home of the referendum is in Switzerland," says Canon Garland. Let any unprejudiced person take the last (the eleventh) edition of the Ency. Brit., article Switzerland; let him read the article dispassionately, particularly with reference to this religious question. I do not think that anyone 'so informed will consider the state of things that exists there desirable. The 1 constitution of 1874, to which Canon Garland refers, forbids Jesuits and affiliated Orders to settle in Switzerland; provides that new bishoprics must be approved by the Federal authority; places the ban on new religious orders. In all the cantons, except Geneva, there are one or more "established" churches. Geneva relieved itself of this burden in 1907, and, logically enough, this canton has the best educational system. On pages 244 and. 245 of th« article referred to 'we find these illuminating words: "Religious tests prevail as to teachers, who must declare the religion they profess, and are required to impart the religious instruction in the school, thie being compulsory on the children professing the religion, that is in the majority in that particular communeconsequently a Protestant teacher would never be appointed in a- Romanist school or vice versa. The religious teaching occupies an houT (always at the beginning of the school hours) thrice a week, while special dogmatic instruction is imparted by the paetor outside the school hours as a rule, or in a Toom specially set apart therein. The pa6tor is ex. officio president of the Schulltommission, while the Teligious teaching in school is based on a special "school Bible," containing short versions of the chief events in Biblo history. If this be the normal Teault of the application of the referendum, to religious issues, the people of this country will, I trust, have non» of it. The advantages', of the referendum, as stated by Canon Garland, are interesting ; unfortunately for him and his mission, the plebiscite on the liquor question has clearly shown that the method does not solve the issue nor remove the question from general politics; some Prohibitionists have been urging that their issue should be made the 6ole determining factor at next election. Sajrs Canon Garland: —"lf the referendum is carried the league stands, for the national system," i.e., Canon Garland's Bystem. But if not—? Let Rev. W. Gray Diron speak: "Our fellow-church-men of the Dutch race in South Africa have just within the last few months witnessed a good confession in this matter. Supported by the Scottish Presbyterians, the Anglicans, and the Wesleyans, they presented a solid front of 90 per cent, of the European Christians of Cape Province. But the secularist opposition there, as it is here, was keen. Whereupon the Dutch Party did not shrink from saying that, /were its claim for religious teaching in the State schools not granted, it would flood the country with it* own denominational schools and wreck tho Government school system." (Outlook, 11th November, 1913, p. 20.) Heads I win, taile you lose. (3.) Canon Gariand insist* that only one question is requested; he knows fnll well that two distinct issues are involved in the league's proposals: Bible leesorus and the right of entry. Last year Mr. Braithwaite told the public why these two antagonistic systems had been combined—to enable a majority vote > to be obtained. No Parliament with any sense of fairness could, or would, submit to such a. double-barrelled question and demand a mere "yes" or "no" to it. These are two distinct issues, and, if there is a referendum, must be put as such. Canoa Garland's attempt to ishovr that if the league's proposals > were adopted, our system would still be free, secular, and compulsory, is, a» he knows, merely playing with words; words „are two-edged tools, it m strange that the Canon's New Zealand experience has not yet taught him that. With your permission I shall deal with, the general question of a referendum in a future letter.