BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Hokitika Guardian, 15 October 1932, Page 5

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

SECTARIAN VIEW DEBATE IN UPPER HOUSE. (Ter Press Association — Copyright.} WELLINGTON, October 14. Continuing the debate in the Legislative Council on the second reading of the Religious Instructions in Schools Enabling Bill, Mr Lsitt said he supported tile Rill beenuno thousands of children were living in heathenism, ignorant or even simple religious rules. Parents who had not been taught religion could not l,e expected to hand on teachings of religion to their children. He was pleading for the child life of the nation and those who had to iioht the evil elfcct of the (secular © system which was cumulative. When the system was introduced, young people lived on the teachings their fathers had received, but this process could not go on. Magistrates had pointed to the growing evil of education without religious instruction 'and ho was convinced from experience that the ground could nob be covered adequately by the Nelson system. The bogey of sectarian strife had been raised, but there' was no strife in secondary schools, where religious instruction was given. Catholics in agreeing to the Bill had promised not to press for State grants. Sir Francis Bell said the whole question was whether the spiritual aspect of the child should be under the care of the State. It should not be the part of the State co direct religious training, because religious trainin o- was an individual matter on which no two men could agree. The statements made by the sponsors of the Bill were a libel on the children, which he refused to believe If children were dishonest or immoral they could not he saved by dogma. It was a question whether essential characteristics could he built up by dogma, which was necessary for religious instruction. There was no doubt the reason why a section of the Catholics had recoiled from the agreement to the Bill, was because the promoters wished them (Catholics) to promise that they would not ask for State grants if the Bill was passed. He, as a lawyer and politician, contended they had a perfect right to ask for State grants if the Bill were passed. Mr Witty said that if the measure was passed it would result in sectarian bitterness, which was at present entirely absent from children. When Mr lsitt had been in the Lower House he had opposed the Bibl l e'-in Schools Bill, hut now that he did not have to depend on the electors for votes, he had become a supporter of the measure.

OTAGO ANGLICAN SYNOD. SUPPORTS THE MEASURE. DUNEDIN, October 12. The Anglican Synod, at its sessior yesterday afternoon, discussed at length the Bible-in-Schools Bill, and the general opinion was that, while the Bill did not go as far as the Syncd wished, it was a step in the right direction, and was worthy of the support of the Synod. The matter was brought up by Archdeacon Russell, who moved: “That this Synod commends ‘The Religious Instruction in Public Schools Enabling Bill’ to the prayers and support of church people throughout the diocese.” The motion was seconded by the Rev. IV. A. Hamblett, who said that the Bill was not all that they wanted, but it was a step in the right direction ,and they should support it and then press on for something more. The Rev. K. 1). Andrews-Baxter considered the Bill did not go far enough, and it was open to question whether they should not fight for something better and not accept a compromise like the present Bill. The Bill was all right for othgr churches, hut the Church of England fell in every time. He thought they should fight for the right to enter the schools to teach their own children. After further discussion, in the course of which members considered that half a loaf was better than no bread, the motion was carried, only Mr Amlrews-Baxter dissenting.

DISCUSSION OF BILLS. WELLINGTON, October 15. Tli e Imprest Supply 14'll, providing for allocations tot riling £14,482,000 was parsed bySoth Houses of Parliament yesterday. The debate on the second reading of tlm Religious ln-truction in Schools Enabling Bill was continued in the l.ogi.s'alivy Council, and was again adjourned. The House'-rose at 6.40 o’clock till Tuesday afternoon. The Council rose at 8.10 o'clock till Wednesday afternoon.