BIBLE IN SHOOLS

Evening Post, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 93, 16 October 1914, Page 8

BIBLE IN SHOOLS

FURTHER ADVERSE EVIDENCE ATTITUDE OP TEACHERS ME. JOHN CAUOHLEY CROSSEXAMINED. /A CLERGYMAN'S EXPERIENCE IN ', NEW SOUTH WALES. The Education Committee of the House of Representatives resumed its • -hearing to-day of e.vidence on the Bible-in-Schools question as bearing on the proposals of the Bible-in-Schools Referendum Bill before Parliament early in the session. Mr. G< M. Thomson, chairman, presided. The cross-examination of Mr. John Caughley, M.A., headmaster of the Christchurch West School, representing the New Zealand Educational Institute, was continued by the Rev. Canon Garland, on behalf of the Bible-in-Schools League. Mr. Caughley stated that with two exceptions the district institutes had carried resolutions against the Bible-in-Schools League's proposals. He had not exercised any special influence as president of the institute. He considered it his duty as an honest man to oppose with all his power the propaganda of the Bible-in-Schools League. The Teachers' Institute in Queensland had expressed regret, after the < Bible in schools had been made effective by law, that as a body teachers had not made more determined efforts to oppose the movement. He had voluntarily taught children the Bible for twenty years, but he objected W being compelled to dd so. If the [State supported any denominational school it ought in justice to support others. Teachers in general •were not opposed to religious instruction; it was simply the method promoted by the Bi file-in- Schools League. ' DOES THE INSTITUTE REPRESENT TEACHERS? ' The Chairman, after Canon Garland had read long extracts from books, asked what was the object and purport of such a procedure. Canon Garland said his object was to try to show that the Teachers' Institute was not in agreement with the teaching profession in general — 'not on the particular merits of the League's system, but on the question whether there should be some form of religions instruction or not. Mr. Caughley said that teachers were in accord with eminent authorities in regard to the Bible and religious instruction. Of the certificated teachers of New Zealand the institute included 95 per cent. Outside the institute were a number of uncertiflcated and pupilteachers. The institute was forbidden by law to include uncertificated teachers. There was no corporate body in New Zealand, which had consulted its members so thoroughly as to their attitude on the Bible-in-schools question. .The Presbyterian Church, to which he belonged, had not taken nearly the same trouble on the question. The session of elders of St._ Andrew's Church, Christchurch, of which he was not a member, had not consulted the congregation before passing a resolution in favour of the Bible in schools. _ At this stage Mr. M'Calltun, member of the Committee, rose and protested againafc the time taken by Canon GarJand in his cross-examination. He had already taken three hours and the Cony mittee could not sit more than two more mornings as Parliament must come to an end within a week or a fortnight. He wanted to ask the Chairman to divide up the time that remained. Could Canon Garland go on as he was doing and take the restof the time? He believed he was doing it deliberately. Canon Garland : No. I must protest against that. Mr. M'Callum said that Canon Garland had already taken far longer than he should— over three hours. Canon Garland : lam nearly done. I am very sorry, I had no desire to transgress the wishes of any member of the Committee. So much new matter has been introduced. ' In answer to a further question Mr. Caughley said that congregations had been consulted as to their attitude on the Bible in schools, but the elders had not consulted the congregation of his own particular church. Tho session gave its own opinion as a session. RIVAL TEACHERS. Canon Garland : Is it true that you said in public that you had put the Bible ijn the hands of more children than Canon Garland had done. Mr. Caughley : I said something to that effect. How do you know how many children T have taught?' — I do not know, but I have been told by nearly every minister I have met in New Zealand that I had given more religious instruction than any minister they knew. I put you down as an average minister. Canon Garland : Do you know I have taught tens of thousands 'of children the Bible in my career, which has reached its silver jubilee only this month. Mr, Gaughley -. I was not aware of it. This concluded the cross-examination of Mr. Gaughley by Canon Garland. To Professor Hunter '. He was an honorary, not a paid, officer of the institute. He had been a Sunday school teacher for twenty years', lecturer at Sunday school conferences on seven different occasions during his holidays, had conducted during his leisure time Sunday school teachers' training classes, was editor, for a number of years of the Sunday school column in The Outlook, had acted as a lay preacher for a number of years for a number of Nonconformist Churches. He Regretted that more attention was not given to Sunday schools, but there was a revival. If the Bible-in-schools were adopted, then many of the best teachers would have to_ leave the profession on account of their religion, and religious interests would affect appointments more than ever. This concluded the evidence of Professor Hunter. MR. BATES GIVES EVIDENCE. Mr. D, C, Bates was the next witness. At the outset he claimed 'that he was entirely disinterested andi held independent views. He had had nearly seven years' experience (1891-1898) as an Anglican clergyman in New South Wales, and, taking great interest in_ religious instruction, was diligent in giving lessons in the public schools. The New South Wales system, said Mr. Bates, provided a Scriptture text book and allowed ministers of all demoniations one hour per day for religious instruction. This had come to mean one lesson per week wherever it was in vogue. The Government provided the Irish text book as part of the school equipment, but he bad 1 never known a teacher who used it. As for the "right of entry," it was j ■usually highly commended in public by J Church dignitaries, but widely neglected in practice. This was confirmed by statistical information, showing that a vast number of the schools were unvisited. At the Sydney Synod y in 1910 it was formally; recorded that a report, issued

eighteen years before was still " appropriate to tho present time." That report read : " The committee are reluctantly compelled to avow their conviction that, unless a more lively and more persistent interest in this work shall be shown by members of the Synod in recess as well as in session and by members of tho Church at large, the work itself must languish, perhaps be finally abandoned." With regard to general instruction in religion and the text-book, the committee complained that the " time formerly given by State teachers to general ! religious instruction was now to a large extent devoted to the teaching of' history, civics, and morals/ Extra pressure, said the witness, and a special call must have beep made, for the returns of clerical visitors were said to be " more complete than they have been for several years"; still, "in some schools it must reluctantly be assumed that no special religious instruction ia given, for the rectors of twenty parishes have failed after repeated applications to furnish any information." "On the whole," said Mr. Bates, "I regard the system as a failure and a- reproach to the Churchea themselves. ... I think New South Wales must have raked with a small-tooth comb to get the few favourable opinions of teachers published by the league,* a Queensland member 01 Parliament said that 90 per cent, of the teachers are against it." , MISDIRECTED EFFORT. "I myself have reason to believe,'* proceeded witness, "that the vast majority of the, teachers of the State schools would for many reasons rather be without either general or special religious instruction in the State schools. In my opinion, they look upon the subject as an outside one, and the ministers merely privileged intruders. Teachers are no%v discouraged from expressing their opinions on maiters affecting school work, and it would la.y anyone giving an Sbnestly adverse opinion open to severe reprimand, if not dismissal, and certainly to positive misunderstanding or persecution. The system is in possession in New South Wales, and as all religions are naturally conservative and aggressively tenacious of any privilege, however neglected, common prudence makes men afraid to run hostile to clerical interests, and few wish to court unpopularity. The school should not be regarded as the recruiting ground for adherent's of the Church any more than for itinerant showmen or lecturers on even art, science, or politics. ... If only the effort put forward by the League had been devoted to the Sunday schools much good would hd>ve resulted. The Church must look to itself > for spiritual awakening and not political effort and forcing its sacred books and ministers into the schools. As Professor J. J. Findlay says in his book, 'The School* :— 'The proper venue for religious instruction is not the public school, with the Anglican teaching one group in room X and the Catholic another group ' in, room Y. The church building, the house of God itself, in the fit place of assenibly for teaching the distinctive doctrines which the Church holds dear, and the clergyman himself is the fittest teacher. It would surely not be difficult for the law to recognise, "attendance" once or more a week in church buildings.' " EVERYWHERE A FAILURE. After describing religious instruction in secular schools as a failure both in South Africa and Germany as well, Mr. Bates said he regarded the introduction of the Bible-and-Clergy-in-State-Schools-League's programme as unnecessary and inexpedient for this country, as well as inadvisable for the clergy themselves, who were, as a rule, very poorly paid and had already plenty of scope for their energies.^ They would get no extra remuneration for even the out-of-pocket expenses involved in the work of State school teaching, and from what he knew, the work itself would, as a rule, prove highly unsatisfactory, and show little if any benefit to compensate for dangers which might be easily recognised. | "This country has for a long time," 1 said the witness, "had a splendid educational system, which has been thoroughly approved of by the country. There is, I am sure/ less sectarian strife, more church observance, better morals, and less crime, than in New South Wales. The introduction of different religious sects into school life would not only inconvenience the usual routine work of the school, but foster dissension even amongst the children, especially in country places and one-roomed schools." RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION. "With regard to the programme of the Bible-(and-Clergy)-in-State-Schools League, I understand that people have been deprived of business support through failure to sign this ticket. It is also common knowledge that the dignity of Parliament has been outraged by Members being threatened with pledged opposition in a so-called 'League of Earnestness,' which binds itself to oppose every Member of Parliament who may N exercise his vote according to the dictates of his conscience, the results of the investigation of this Committee, and the united deliberations of the whofe body, and go against the Bill. Deplorable as are the dissensions in families, the present discord in Christian Churches, and the introduction of bigoted partiality into business affairs, I regard these as nothing compared with the evila that may* arise from the importation of the persecuting' spirit into Parliament and the elections of this Dominion. Tho plebiscite, itself differing as it does from the referendum, offers a very questionable precedent for democratic legislation especially where religious sentiment is concerned, and presents a new field of operation for the opportunist and the agitator. In conclusion, gentlemen, I would like to say that to the beat of my knowledge and ability, I have tried truly and fairly to show you ihat tlie New South Wales system lias proved unsatisfactory, that the League scheme is inexpedient for the people of New Zealand, and that this so-called 'referendum' or plebiscite Bill as it stands is a surrender of the rights and privileges of Parliament, offering a precedent for mob rule." "YOU ARE AN AGITATOR. 1 !. Canon Garland i Do you consider yourI self a representative of the Church of England ? , ! Mr. Bates : Yes. „ Yet you are outside' the Church ; you are working outside the Church; you 1 are a Civil servant?— You are working outside tho Church, you are an agitator. Canon Garland : That is a matter of opinion. Mr. Bates : I wish to say that I have been forced to earn my living through ill-health. I can point to my services in South Africa. I object to this sort of. reflection. Canon Garland : Mr. Bates, you misjudge me Very much.^ I had no intention whatever of making any reflection. I want to try and show that you, being engaged in secular pursuits, are not representative of the opinion of the Church of England on this subject. Mr. Bates : I represent the Church as much as you do. You earn your living outside the Church as I do. You are an agitator. The witness wa-s further examined ka to the attitude of ministers of the Church of England in Sydney on the question of the Bible in schools. Mr. Bates strongly objected to the form of the Canon's questions. He wa© ready to be examined on his own evidence, but not to bring in fresh evidence. It was not fair. Canon Garland : I don't propose to go on with the examination of thie witness. /

tho order of witness* in the case for the Bibte-in-Schools. Canon Garland desired to arrange the order himself, but Professor Hunter urged in, fairness to Iris side that the official case for the Bible-in-Schools should be pnt first. After some minutes' consultation in private with the Committee, the Chairman announced that it haa been decided the Committee should meet on Monday next at 10.30 a.m., and every scuceeding day till the evidence wa-9 concluded. Canon Gn.Tla-nd would be allowed to place his witnesses in any order he desired, but he himself must be prepared to give his evidence not later thnn Thursday. The 'Committee- then adjourned until Monday.