BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 35, 10 August 1934, Page 11

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

INSTITUTE IN REPLY

Tv a further reply to tho statements of the Eev. N. F. E. Bobertshawo, chairman of tho Bible-in-Sehools League Executive, Wellington, tho New Zealand Educational Institute writes: —

"In reply to the institute's assortion that the Eeligious Instruction Bill gives no real guarantee that teachers who aro unwilling to carry out its provisions will not have to suffer for their convictions, the Eov. Mr, Bobcrtshawe merely reiterates tho argument that tho Bill proposes to leave the teachers full and unfettered choice as to whether they will take part in religious observances and instruction or not.' Again he makes no attempt to nieot the practical objection that tho 'full and unfettered choice' exists only on paper, and that, especially in some small country schools, tho teacher who is unwilling to give religious teaching runs tlio serious risk of incurring the censure and disapproval of a section of the parents whose children ho toaehes. Actually a case has occurred during tho last few months which demonstrates only too clearly the degree of moral pressure to which objecting teachers will frequently bo subjected, and if Mr. Eobcrtshawo cares to have tho details he is welcome to them. "Mr. Eobbrtshawc scouts' the idoa that some teachers who are not sincerely convinced may undertako tho work. But tho institute contends that teachers as a body would not bo human if in the circumstances bobio of thorn did not, consciously or unconsciously, adopt an attitude of outward conformity as the only meanß of protecting themselvos from the consoquoneos of a rigid adherence to principle Far from making an 'insidious' charge the institute bolievos that similar causes would produce similar-effects in the caso of any body of professional workers. THE POSITION IN ENGLAND. ' "Mr. Eobertshawo refers to cxperionco in other countries; 'Tho teachers in Now South Wales, Canada, England, and elsowhero enter into roligious teaching wholeheartedly, and wo do not hear of complaint's about lack of promotion, sectarian strife, or undue hardship because of religious conviction.' Wo can only say that Mi-. Eobertshawo appears to be completely misinformed as to what is happening in other countries. He quotes the caso of England. Mr. Eobertshawo will probably admit that Dr. Cyril Norwood, a coreligionist and until recently headmaster of Harrow, . can speak with authority on religious teaching in English schools. Yet Dr. Norwood quotes the following as a substantially correct description of religious instruction in English day secondary schools: 'It is a byword among those who havo inside knowledge that this subject is tho Cinderella of tho curriculum. Tho weekly period of Biblo teaching is relegated to any hole and corner of tho timo-tablo,-i which no one wants for tho more im-! portant subjects of science and art. The teaching of it is delegated to any member of the staff who will give a grudging consent to undertake it, or j who has nothing better to do. It is sometimes taught by agnostics aud atheists who cynically confess in the common room that they would as lief teach Mohammedanism if paid to do so. It is rarely taught by a specialist or anyone who knows anything about the subject. And when it is taught its trueintention and purpose aro often defeated by making of it a memory lesson to bo crammed for a leaving examination.' ' • ■ ." "If space permitted we could quote many similar indictments of religious teaching in English elementary and secondary schools. In the last few years particularly there havo been constant complaints'that religion is taught unwillingly, perfunctorily, and incompetently. Yet this, is the system which is held up,for our admiration and emulation and the introduction of which into New Zealand schools would, it is believed, produce a mighty spiritual awakening among our people! "As for there being.'no complaints about lack of promotion, sectarian strife, and undue hardship because of religious convictions,' this again is miles from the truth. Nonconformist journals such as 'The British Weekly' have published articlo after article protesting in the strongest terms against a system which, it is believed, does tho gravest injustice to Nonconformist teachers. 'There are ton thousand headships,' declared a Primitive Methodist teacher a year or two ago, 'from which I and my fellowchurchmen aro debarred. 1 This again is the system which is supposed to work so smoothly, so harmoniously, and so equitably. "Finally, we must protest against the very snrlous misrepresentation, contained'in* the statement —'If we are to believe the N.Z.E.1., most of tho teachers in Now Zealand are agnostics.' This has been neither stated nor implied, and if Mr. Bobertshawo can sec no difference between agnosticism and a feeling that ono has no vocation for a task of the nature of religious instruction it is futile to prolong the controversy with, him."