THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. FRIDAY, MAY 8, 1896.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10126, 8 May 1896, Page 4

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. FRIDAY, MAY 8, 1896.

The question of religious education in the schools has naturally taken an important position in the deliberations of the Church Congress now sitting in Auckland. The clergy of the Church of England had taken a leading part in the recent movement of the religious denominations in favour of having a measure of religious instruction imported into the curriculum of the public schools of the colony, in the form of the text books formerly in use in the Irish National Schools; and generally they have been identified with the advocacy of religion being made an integral part of any public system of school, teaching. This subject therefore was in place in a Congress assembled to consider questions in which the Church is interested, and it must be admitted that there was a tone of moderation characterising the statements of even the warmest advocates of religious instruction, that was creditable to them as good citizens. The subject is one in which there are legitimate grounds for difference of opinion, and there seemed a happy absence of any tendency to charge those opposed to the intervention of the State in the teaching of religion through its paid officers, with being enemies to godliness and God. It is pretty well recognised now that the difference between opposing sides on this question, is ' not caused by any difference of opinion or of feeling as to the vital value of religion, but only as to the principle or expediency of religion being taught by State paid officers. It is recognised by all, save a very insignificant minority in this colony, that the education of the youug is incomplete without instruction in the principles of religion; but it is to be equally recognised that nobody, not even the most ardent advocate of our secular system, professes that it is in. tended by it to impart a complete education. The State, according to our theory, only instructs, does not educate, but it instructs in certain branches of education, leaving it to others, to parents, to the Churches and their agencies, to perfect that education, by teaching the religious truths which the State is considered neither entitled nor competent to impart. The position so taken is a logical one, and easily 'intelligible, and a correct understanding of it greatly simplifies the discussion of this important question. la the course of the Congress there was naturally a considerable difference of opinion expressed. One speaker maintained that "denominational education, and that alone, would make their children Christian children." jit might be asked, would even that produce such result t It might make them well instructed in the tenets of religion, but it can:,ot be said that denominational education has shown so marked a difference of results in turning out " Christian children," if we are to judge from the fruits, as shown in the after lives of the population. As a matter of fact, what is known as the denominational Bchoolsystem, imparts ordinarily but a limited amount of religious teaching within a fixed period in the day's syllabus of studies, and all the* major part of the instruction, as in arithmetic, geography, grammar and the rest, is imparted on the same lines as instruction is given in so-called secular schools. That modicum of religious instruction is quite within the competency of the friends of religious teaching to impart in connection with our State system, and the statement that the whole couwo of instruction in denominational schools

Bsaturated with religion is not based on fact, But denominational schools are not recognised by either party m within the sphere of practical politics under the conditions of colonial life, so they need ' not be discussed; the question really being, how far can a measure of religious teaching be introduced into our existing system 1 The several ways by which this might be attempted were fairly stated at the Congress. It is urged on the one hand, that the State school teachers might impart the instruction, either by direct teaching, which was little pressed, or by the bare reading of the Bible without note or comment, or by a system of textbooks, preferably those formerly in use in;the Irish schools, containingan irreducible minimumof religioustruth, in which little objection would be found by the different denominations. Any of these would, of course, traverse the principle of allowing no State aid to religion, "which is embodied in our constitution, and on which a large number of people take very strong grounds, some to the extent of thinking that such a union of Church and State is sinful. That the employment of a religious text-book under the supervision of the teachers, would be the employing of State machinery and State funds for teaching religion is beyond a pet-adventure. The religion taught might be very litttle, but it would be religion, and that it would be unfair to some sections of our citizens is not to be disputed. One speaker referred to certain Board Schools in London at which "a large proportion of the children were Jews, and not seven in a thousand withdrew when religious instruction was given;" and it shows how sectarian partizanship can produce obliquity of the moral vision, when this incident was quoted with approval, This evidently raeaus that public revenues may be rightly expended in the work of proselytising. It is quite true that State teaching may be made so good and so attractive as to prove a temptation to people to violate their consciences. But this will not commend itself to honest men. God loves not robbery for burnt offering, and sacrifices in this way obtained by stealth are not to be commended, however desirable in our estimation the ends might be. It is the spirit of British fair play that speaks when we protest against the common funds of the State being devoted, whether in little or large amounts, to teach tenets which are not acceptable to the consciences of some of the community. The difficulty of combining compulsory attendance and religious teaching of any kind in the schools of a community so mixed as ours, simply amounts to an impossibility in the temper of colonial life. It may be done in England or any place else, where traditional wrongs have grown into conventional right; but in the colonies it can never be. If the Church is as anxious, as it professes to be, to engraft religion on the instruction of the children of the State, the course is clear enough. It was indicated by Canon Nelson when, after referring to the institution of lay readers, he asked, "had not the time come when they may have working side by side in every town and diocese another faithful, earnest, well equipped and well prepared band of licensed teachers ?" That is the true solution of the problem, and if the Churches are earnest in their profession of anxiety for the religious education of the young, instead of trying to filch the public revenues for doing the Church's work, they should in this way put their own shoulders to the wheel, and provide a band of trained religious teachers to complete the work of the State.

It has been often urged that if the public were appealed to by a plebiscite they would pronounce for religion in the schools as an integral part of the State curriculum, and such a plebiscite .is part of the scheme contemplated for obtaining the introduction of the Irish Text-books. The best answer to this is the cable message that appeared in our yesterday's issue, telling of the result of the plebiscite just taken on religious education in South Australia. The communities of all these colonies are moulded on the same lines, and hold pretty much the same religious, social, and political sentiments. And in South Australia it has just been determined, by three to one, in favour of the existing secular system ot education, by nearly two to one against Bible-reading in the sohools, and by more than three to one.against a capitation allowance being given to denominational schools. The Church of England and all the churohes should realise the fact that the people of these colonies will not permit religion to be degraded through entrusting it to the hands of the hirelings of the State, and they should gird up their loins manfully and go in and do their own work in the schools as the Godappointed teachers of religion.