RELIGION IN SCHOOLS

Greymouth Evening Star, 26 October 1944, Page 3

RELIGION IN SCHOOLS

CONFERENCE DISCUSSION ALL VIEWS OUTLINED CHRISTCHURCH. October 25. A more definite expression of what religious interests have in mind when they advocate greater attention to religious instruction in schools, and also a reduction to clear issues of the views of these and other interested parties was sought by the New Zealand Educational . Conference, after spending all this afternoon discussing this matter. A large .-body of opinion favoured retention, in its present form, of the “Nelson system,” whereby clergy enter schools for one period each week. But, by a fairly narrow margin, it was agreed that the Conference should endeavour to take the matter further, and present some more useful contribution. A, committee was set up to present the statement requested. Four main bodies of opinion were represented in speakers invited to open the discussion. The National Council of Churches urged the fundamental need for religion in education, and this was supported by the Catholic Church. The New Zealand Educational Institute represented the view that any extension of the present system was fraught with danger to teacher and pupil. Laymen in the profession should not be expected to undertake instruction in a subject which was in the province of the Church. Rev. H. W. Newall. Secretary of the National Council of Churches, referred to the increased attention given to some form of worship in the schools, and asked for more religious instruction. It gave, a continuity to each generation, and also a connection with the endeavour and the achievement of the past. It set the child asking the right questions—such enormous questions as: What is man? Whence do I come? What is my purpose? and, finally, religion was deeply rooted in our national culture. The Church was very grateful for opportunities to enter the schools, but it wanted religion to become part of the school cuaTiculum, instead of something which was taken before the real business oi school day began. The President of the New Zealand Educational Institute, Mr. J. Barnett, said teachers opposed the inclusion of religious training m the school curriculum, because it was considered beyond their province. One section of a recent book, m which religious teaching was referred to, raised a storm of controversy. How could teachers be expected to cope with a subject on which the Church itself had not reached any practical degree of unanimity? T/ie general principles of Christian ethics were already inculcated in the schools, but any more advanced instruction might do irreparable harm to youpg minds at their most crucial stage of development. “The Church seeks to impose on the teaching profession a duty for which it was never trained or ordained,” said Mr. BarnGThe question became reduced to one of truth or falsehood, in the eyes of the Rationalist Association, said its delegate. Mr. F. A. De La Mare His Association’s contention was that utterly unproved and improbable beliefs were being taught, without recourse to the normal educational process of inquiry and proof from personal observation. He knew that morals were not governed; by religious teaching. Army leave in Paris or Cairo was the same with all men when free from home conventions. A so-called religious boy would go with the crowd,. The logical method would be to make thfem think for themselves in youth, and then they could be trusted to look after themselves.

CATHOLIC ATTITUDE. For the Catholic Church, Rev. Dr. H N Gascoigne said that his Church believed in the fundamental place of religion in education, respecting always the citadel, of the freedom of conscience. The three mam spheies of influence were: The home, the Church, and the school; and religion had an equally important part m each. Ninety per cent of the Catholic children were in Church schools. It was not because of the remaining 10 per (font. in the State schools, or because of the Catholic teachers in the State schools, that his Church was interested in this conference, but it was as citizens in society. No statute, however carefully worded, could safeguard abuses ii the teachers of religion in the State schools were members of the teaching profession. There must be no penalisation of the profession on conscience grounds. For that reason the teaching of religion should be done by those outside, who were trained to teach it—by the Churches. His Church was adamant on this point. The only practical solution was the legislation of the Nelson System. Mr. A. B. Grant (New Zealand Federation of Labour) claimed that he represented 200,000 members wno thought that the Churches should be allowed to do their own work, without giviig children a bias m Jreii schools. ’ Religious dogma should not be implanted in the child mind wnich was yet incapable of reasoning for itself. Russia had . made progress when it tipped religion >. Mr. H. B. Burdikm (N.Z.R.S.A.) said that he did not think all the workers supported Mr. Grant s statement. He expressed the R.S.A. s support for religious teaching m . the schools, by the clergy or by trained laity The tragedy was the disunity among the Churches. A spirited attack on certain organisations for placing responsibil ty for shortcomings on Jeacheis was made by Mr. D. Forsyth (N.Z. Educational Institute). Religion m schools was not systematised, he said. From a long experience of nunisieis who visited schools, he found that thev squabbled among themselves, argued who might take Standaid 6 and who had to take Standaid 1. They arrived 10 or 15 minutes late, and they often left early. The Bible in Schools League had spent thousands of pounds, in trying to force religious instruction into schools. , It they had spent the money training their willing, dehghtfully-m--competent, Sunday School teachers, and on making their own institutions effective, much more good would have been done. I suggest that the Church should put its house in order,” Mr. Forsyth concluded. Mr. J. V. Burton (Technical School Teachers’ Association) mentioned a difficulty he had encountered in a recent investigation in obtaining from Churches any indication of what they envisaged and exactly what they proposed should be taught in schools. Miss E. E. Stephens (Secondary School Teachers’ Association) said that body was against the right of entry to schools being given to out* siders. and was against doctrinal instruction. Christian ethics were, another matter. These were thoroughly dealt with now. She ventured to say that more pure religion in this form was more sincerely taught in schools than in most homes.

ALL-STORES