RELIGIOUS EDUCATION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 13746, 11 May 1908, Page 7

RELIGIOUS EDUCATION.

VIEWS OF CORRESPONDENTS. ! TO-THE EDITOR. Sin,—The Rev. Mr.Scott-Moncrieff has written a long letter in answer to my suggestion that he had missed the point of the controversy/ which is, and was, " Is it the duty of the State to teach religion. He answers that it is, and his proof is as follows The New Zealand State is. composed " mainly"- of, at least, nominal Christians, therefore it is a Christian State, and his conclusion is that- therefore one of its functions is to teach Christianity. This is a short and ready way of defining the functions of a State. It is surely to be regretted that : when Humboldt, Dupont White, Spencer, Laveieye, and others were searching for some principle to guide the student of ; olitical science in defining the sphere and duties of Government, fhey never thought- of such a short method of determining the question.,- By the same method of reasoning the teaching of autocracy and of Greek Catholicism by the State in Russia is defensible, and the State Church can be proved to be a proper institution .for 'a Christian State. Further, were ill'. Scott- , MoncriefTs reasoning accepted, the religious persecutions that have in the past disgraced humanity could be all justified. Let us apply this principle to the.question under discussion. The vast majority of ihe people in New Zealand believe .that the Church must- be separated from the State. It has been New Zealand's creed since the beginning of representative government in the Dominion, and adopting Mr. Scott-Moncrieff s mode of argument /follows that it is the duty of the State to teach this doctrine to our children, and to tell them that it is wrong for the State to teach religion. 1 wish to say that I never desired to separate the individuals that live in the State i'n/'m the State. The Stale. 1 believe to be hot an " abstraction," but an organism, and I further believe it has its limits, for if it had not we would be living under a tyranny where the majority could oppress the minority. ■Robert - Stout. Sir, —The public are much indebted to the Rev. Mr. Gray Dixon for so clearly showing that the root question in this religious education question is, " Is it the duty of the State to leach religion?" Many political philosophers, as he points out, wish the duties of the State to be very restricted. They go to the length of holding that education is not a function of the State. Their ideal of a State is a mere policeocracy. Whether the pendulum of social opinion lias not in our day swung too far awav from individualism remains to be seen, v Apparently -Mr. Dixon approves of the present trend of opinion towards the increase of the State's functions and towards Socialism. I part company with' him when lie attempts to show that, it is the duty of, the State to teach religion to children. He does not say it is the duty of the State to teach religion to adults. Have they 110 need of religious instruction? Are there no " pagans" over 21 years of age? Surely if 'it- is the duty of the State to teach a " broad, sane, Biblical Christianity" to bays and girls, the duty cannot tMul when lad or lass-hood is passed. A State Church is as defensible as a State teaching children religion. The religion that the State is to teach is our " national" religion. If, then, it is. a principle of political philosophy or statesmanship that the national religion is, to be taught, the religion taught will vary with the views" of the people of the nation. -Hinduism -would have to be taught in India, Confucianism in the colony of Hongkong, Romanism in .Malta, Episcopacy : in England, Presby- : terianisni in. Scotland, Romanism in Ire- ; land, and Mahometanism in Egypt. , The views of the minority are a "negligible quantity." If four-fifths agree, the onefifth must pay its' share for teaching the creed of the four-fifths. This is sane and liberal and statesmanlike! : But what is a "broad, sane, Biblical Christianity?" Why are the adjectives "broad" and "sane" introduced? Does this mean that the New Theology" or the " Higher Criticism" has permeated the 80 per cent? Surely the public have a right to know what- is included in the definition of our "national" religion, lor example, let. us take the story of event i >n. as told in Genesis. Is this a- fable 01 a fact? Are our children to be taught the theory of " special creation" in our primN ary schools, and the theory of evolution in the University colleges—both under the aegis of the State? Then (he story of the fall through eating an apple, is that true? If so the University college professors of biology ought not to teach the descent of man oil evolutionary lines. ' There are difficulties also in the New Testament. Must a teacher tell his children of the' "Virgin birth, and that the apostles performed miracles? And by-the-by' have miracles ceased? The most numerous body of Christians says no. There is much need of Mr. Dixon telling us what dogmas are to be taught and which ignored. I am somewhat surprised to learn that it is consistent with a " broad, sane, Biblical Christianity" for the clergy to decline to take the opportunity at some odd time" to teach the children, rather than anpear to usurp the functions of the State. By-the-by, what is the meaning of "odd"? I understood the hour was fixed ■ and the clergy were not allowed at "odd" hours to invade the schools. Let us test- this position with which Mi'. Dixon sympathises. Suppose the State did not provide food and lodging for waifs, would it be consistent with a "broad, sane, Biblical Christianity" to let the waifs perish sooner than appear to usurp the State's functions. Surely if it is the duty of the State to feed the minds with religious food, it must be the duty of the State to feed with food the bodies of the famishing. What fools Barnardo, the Salvation Army, and others have been in looking after these waifs! lam afraid, that if a broad, sane, Biblical Christianity inculcates the aloofness with which Mr. , Dixon has some sympathy the usefulness of teaching it will be considered a "negligible quantity." A Scotch Voluntary. Sir, —The Rev. Gray Dixon, in his letter published in Wednesday's Herald, is amazed at the irrelevances, eccentricities,, prejudices, which the discussion 011 this large question has called forth, but I would asks your readers whether it is not still more amazing to find a minister of Mr. Dixon's standing apparently so ignorant of what the Higher Criticism and scientific research has done in the last century to disclose the rottenness of the very foundations of the Biblical Christianity upon which he desires that religious education should be based. Is it possible that the reverend gentleman has never heard of the National-ist-Association of Europe, whose noble ambition it is to establish a. broader and more humane system of ethics, and to spread a knowledge of advanced science among civilised people. Hero let- me say that New Zealanders owe a debt- of gratitude to the National Press Association for bringing ■within reach of even the narrowest- purse cheap reprints of the works of the master minds 011 scientific and ; ethical subjects. • When such works as Darwin's epoch-making "Origin of Species," Huxley's "Lectures and Essays," Haekel's " Riddle of the Universe," Arnold's "Literature and Dogma," Leslie Stephens' "Agnostic's Apology," and many other reprints by the association, " can be purchased in Auckland for sixpence, there is little excuse for any intelligent persons — the clergy included —if they do. not keep themselves abreast- of con temporary;, thought and discovery. The devoted band of scientific explorers are the pioneers who are clearing the way for the- vast army of humanity into a new and better land, and unquestionably it is upon the results of their labours that the religion of the future will be established. It will be a scientific religion based on right, justice, fraternity, with 110 creeds or dogmas to bar the way against the advance of human intelligence. It will, be a religion, as Professor Wilson, author of a "New Light 011 Old Problems," expros*.-* it " capable of satisfying the senti- . ' , ' r .

! mental or emotional part of our nature, en-, abling us to 'feel' that we are in the highest and truest .sense working with God in accordance with His undeviating law. On the practical side, again, this religion might be described as life-work of which the single end is to promote the well-being and 'happiness of men." The watchword of science has ever been. I "the truth at any cost." It recognises that the laws it from time to time formulates from the evidences at hand are always subject to revision as new light breaks over the scene of its labours. It keeps an open mind and modestly admits that- its faith of to-day may be the heresy of to-morrow. It is often erroneously ascribed to scientific agnosticism that it is altogether antagonistic to a divine or idealistic interpretation of the phenomena of the universe-. This is certainly not the-ca.ve, neither is its attitude one of indifference or irreverence, but rather of expectation. It awaits and enthusiastically welcomes every new revelation of .the secrets of nature, every addition to the sum. total of human achievement. Its answer at present, however, to the great enigma of the " Whence and Whither," is a. simple ne-gation—-with humility it confesses that it does not know " where the theologian arrogantly asserts that he is certain." Science, let- me add, is feeling its way slowly, but with courage and high hopes Into the heart of nature towards the mystery of mysteries, and although it- believes that it can never attain to the Fountain Head of all knowledge,- yet it fondly dreams that in the dim ages yet to come it may 'win' its way so far up the stream as to enable it to conceive some more or less adequate theory as to what- lies beyond. Myself and others of this " dreaming generation" who take as their guiding motto " the truth at any cost," at this transition stage when the God of the churches can no longer satisfy the demands of their intellect or their.-consci-ence can only at present, standing in awe before the wonders of the universe, wait for a new revelation and "more light." Rotorua. H. J. Bi.vtu.