BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 91, 14 October 1914, Page 8

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

OBJECTIONS TO PROPOSAL THE CASE FOR TEACHERS EVIDENCE BEFORE COMMITTEE The Education Committee of the House of Representatives sat again this morning to hear further evidence on the Bible-in-schools question and the proposal to submit it to "a referendum. Mr. G. M. Thomson, M.P., Chairman of the Committee, presided, and the members present were Messrs. Malcolm, Sidey, M'Callum, Guthrie, ' J. C. Thomson, Hanan, and Statham, M.P.'s, and Mr. G. Hogben, Chief Inspector of Schools. The Bible-in-Schools League was represented by the Rev. Canon Garland, and the National Schools Defence League by Professors Hunter and Mackenzie. Mr. John Caughley, headmaster of the Christchurch West School, representing the New Zealand Educational Institute, read resolutions of the institute opposing the introduction of the Bible into the schools and compulsory Scripture instruction by teachers. 'Nothing, he said, could justify the' movement of the Bible-in-Schools League except disastrous results from the secular system, which experience could not show, or a great prospective improvement in morality and character, such as could not be anticipated from the introduction of the Bible in school. It was sectarianism, not secularism, that confined the x scope ol public schools. Religious instruction was beneficial in its proper place, but that was not in the regular school hours carried out by the regular school teachers. The secular system set up in 1877 was not set up in any spirit of antagonism to religion, but simply because the founders saw the grave dangers of sectarianism to religious equality. The platform of the Bible in schools stood for sectarian entry into schools, compulsory religious instruction by State teachers, and the destruction of liberty of conscience. The Educational Institute contended that there was direct moral teaching and influence bearing on character already given by teachers in schools of the State. It was personal teaching by precept and example and not the mechanical instruction of a text-book ; the teacher himself was the great living text-book of character. The claim that all teaching of character was based on the Bible was a relic of bygone days. Of all the schemes that had been devised that of the Bible-ln-Schools League was the most mechanical and barren. How could the Bible be read as Canon Garland declared ',' like any other book," or, as another leader of the league had stated, "like a play of Shakespeare"? Another leader had actually expressed in public the opinion that an agnostic could conduct Bible lessons. If the Bible was treated like any other book it was secularised, and Bible teaching would be the same as secular teaching. This was exalting the letter above the spirit with a vengeance. Mr. Caughley said he would be prepared to lay before the Committee over 130 contradictory statements of leaders of the league of a similar nature and quoted a large number. One was from the Rev. I. Jolly : " The teacher should see that the children read the Bible lesson and understand it from a dictionary point of view," and another from Bishop Neville : " The Bible in schools, and religious instruction are synonymous." From the Bible-in-Schools League's propaganda one would think, said the witness, that this was a country into which the Bible never entered, and in which people were prohibited from reading the Bible. There was no remedy for the absence of religious instruction except in the homes. As regarded religious instruction in Australia, Victoria, without the Bible in schools, stood far higher in its church and Sunday-school attendance than New South Wales with its Bible in schools. Out of 43,000 Presbyterian children on the roll in Victorian State schools th<re were 37,000 in the Sunday-schools. Every piece of evidence obtainable showed that the moral condition of the people in Victoria w.as higher than in New South Wales. Taking the average for the years 1901 to 1910, they found that on a population basis New South Wales had 50 per cent, more summary convictions than Victoria, 60 cer cent, more Supreme Court ' convictions for serious crime, 80 per cent, more divorces, 23 per cent, more illegitimate births, 45 per cent, more people in. gaol, and 59 per cent, more drunkenness. TRAVESTY OF RELIGION. It would be difficult to find any greater travesty of religion than that proposed by the League. Teachers and the public generally were amazed that our system of education and tjie neutrality of the State in religion and the rights of conscience, and the normal processes of legislation, should be attacked by* a body of such a character as the League. "We can scarcely conceive Parliament," declared the witness, " allowing the attack to proceed on tbe present lines without the most complete testing of the nature of tho League and its claims. The League claims to have the signatures of some 150,000 people. These are not all electors; the League's card does not even require them to bo electors. The cards are not petition cards; they are not addressed to Parliament; they have not even been presented to Parliament : they are simply members' cards, signed by hundreds of yonng people in their teens. Hundreds did not know what they signed for, and have since signed the opposing cards. Hundreds did not know that they signed approval of the right of entry. Many would have refused to sign had they known there was no conscience clause for teachers. Yet this number of cards is used to impress Parliament and overawe members. The valid number of bona-fide electors whose opinion is cotrectly represented by these cards would form a striking contrast with the 150,000 so often quoted. The scrutiny of the only petition the League has yet'submitted to Parliament has given ample proof of ' the way in which the League secures an appearance of support. . . . We confidently place this matter of the teachers' Tights of conscience in the hands of Parliament, even if it is ' sternly resisted ' by a League which would crush conscience with the Bible." To Canon Garland : He knew of a large number of Protestant ministers, in addition to those who had openly supported the secular system of schools, ' who privately held similar views, but dared not express them publicly. The Presbyterian Church of New Zealand officially had declared in favour of the Bible-in-Schools, yet in the church in Christchurch to which lie (the witness) belonged, a large Presbyterian church, the matter had never been before tho congregation. Ho denied it a-s a fact that the Presbyterian, Church, speaking of its individual members right throughout New Zealand, was anything like unanimous in favour of Bible-in-Schools, as suggested by the League. Mr. Caughley quoted from Queensland Hansard to show that the Presbyterian General Assembly in Queensland had, twice discussed the Bible-in-Schools question, and twice passed on to the next business, thus dropping the question. At this stage the Committee adjouraed, to the aftgrnopn.