MORAL AND RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION IN SCHOOLS.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXIX, Issue 10773, 23 May 1911, Page 2

MORAL AND RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION IN SCHOOLS.

Following is tin' tf-xt of the lecture clclivi'i-rd li.v Mr A. -\I. Harnett at tlio meeting oi' the School Teachers' Association, and which will be discussed at next meeting:— The syllabus, September, 190G, says moral .instruction must be given, see section 3S, and states how it should be given, see section 48, and these regulations "have the-force of law,'.' _sce section 172,-sub-section'2,-; Education Act, 1008. I'hold that to he "truly moral the teaching'should be based on Christian truths, therefore should he. religious. I am much indebted to Currie for sup-

port in establishing my arguments,, therefore I shrll quote from him. It is a general maxim that the parent shall educate the child, especially in religion, One can allow one's thoughts to pictuve a nation in its infancy, and see every parent exercising its child according to sex, in imitation of its own prowess, : n the sustaining of the body, in build••Jtr, in shooting, in war, in religion, etc. Then as that nation progresses one can sec certain functions being relegated to certain sections of the community. Still it is held that the parent shall in the main educate, or instruct if you like, the child. But tliere comes a time when large masses of the people, through poverty, through neglect by their fellows, through sin, fail to keep themselves or their children from going lower and lower down stream. "Itis, - ' say some of the parents, "that it is as bound to educate the child as it is to provide for its bodily sustenance." But "if in any of .society this discharge of dutv by the family is found to any State impracticable, then the blame is so far removed from the parent in particular to society itself at large ; but the blame rests.somewhere." Tt undoubtedly/ follows that the State finding these nYassos neglecting the duty set forth by the axiom aforesaid started to provide means for the education of those who could not, or wore not, receiving it either from an intellectual or moral point of view. It was desired that all should he good citizens, a help, not a burden, to the State. . If this bo not true, then answer me, Why did the State interfere? Why did it enter into competition with those who had taken the work in hand, and why did it make it free so that others were driven from the field ? And, further, should it do it only in part, leaviiif the harder to the Weaker? "We are told that the work of the school is one of great dignity. One often hears speakers shooting at the skv with their lofty notions. "But there must often be in one's mind alurking disbelief in those lofty views he hears propounded." Yet there are ample grounds for elevating the teacher's work and giving that spirit which alone comes from a devout faith in greatness and the power of God's love.

But lot us assume that the parent is doing part, though a small part, in up the child in the Christian faith, still "it is the function of the school to support and supplement the education of the family. Equally with the family the school is hound to maintain the pupil's bodily health. In London last winter the School Board provided food for thousands'of its children— so it must foster the growth of the morality and religion which the family implants "_ Where the family education is deficient, the school will naturally do its best to make good the defect: to implant those principles of morality arid religion which the child should bring to school with him. "In fact, the schope of school education has to deal with the child in all the aspects of its nature —physical, moral and intellectual. And according to the purpose of the 1006 syllabus, there should be co-ordination —such co-ordina-tion that there should be harmony of development. "Whatever may be said of "moral instruction in its widestsense is to be understood as applying equally ■'■-> religious instruction which falls under it." "For education should be neither exclusively intellectual, nor exclusively moral, nor exclusively religious. It should be at once religious, moral and intellectual. It should be religious that it may be assuredly moral, moral to be correctly religious, and intellectual for the sake alike of religion and morality." In section 4S of the syllabus much is made of the formation of habit—many and various are the hints given ; but none of them so great as the habit of faith, of reverence, of love for God and man. True it is that "early habits are the most easily formed and the strongest." Yet some say. leave the habit of belief, of prayer, of the worship of God. alone. It is for'the parent who bothers not with it, or for the church, which in many cases cannot reach it. This I shall show further on.

"It is not for the school, not for the Stnte! Some would say leave the child nnhiassed; we should not prejudice the child in early years. Arc wo not prejudicing the child against religion. "We must prejudice him in some way from the nature of the case: and it is better to prejudice him to what is right than to what is wrong." Butler's Analogy of Religion. Of course, I am assuming that from what I heard on Saturday. 4th March, that the mass of the teachers hold to religious education, eacli having his own view as to who should give it and where it should be given. The morality based on the hints given in the syllabus would be in many cases "without intelligence and conscious motive therefore it would be the morality of a machine, like that' of the sailor, or the prisoner, under discipline. Yet some will say we can have morality outside of .religion, for it is not identical and interchangeable with religion any more than intelligence is." That is time, but there is an insepar-able-connection in human nature —perhaps not in the stoic —an inseparable connection as co-ordinate element of our nature, and we should give to them that cultivation which is their due, "and we should bring in the sanction of religion to hallow and strengthen them."

What motive had the State when it set up its free and secular system of education ? I have my opinion. But here is a motive for religious teaching given b'v Mr J. L. Paton, on loth June, 1907. English Journal of Education', .Till;,', 1907. at Bedford College. Speaking of morality without religion, Mr r.-i-'n said: "there, is a strong smell of something left out. ... In plain words, the syllabus is drawn on nontiicttlogicil lines. In plain words, it leaves out God." He still held to his Snorter Catechism that the chief aim ot man was to glorify God. Morals breakdown without religion, just as religion breaks down ' without morality. Concluding this line of aiguraeiit, I would quote from the "History of the Church of Christ," by Herbert Kelly, to chow what is the highest thought and motive in education. "The beginning of the Heavenly City lies in the Creation itself. In all visible tilings, if we take them visibly, we are animals. The transcending of our nature is td : see in them the primary spiritual meaning, purpose,-law ; to, guess at. this ia to be a philosopher; to-infer it so far as it can be inferred, is-to be a scientist; to learn' it of God Himself is to be a Christian, for to such learning, as plainly the knowledge of the creative essence is the end, so the knowledge of Christ is the means."-''We acknowledge God as the ruler and law-giver for the universe, and as the State acknow-

ledges Him as its law-giver, so should the State make provision for the teaching of God's laws and personality even though'the State teach not.. The question naturally arises, How can it? . Before going oil to answer that question I would show that the oft-repeated, assertion, repeated for 30 years, repeated in ; ihis room on March 4th, that "the Church must-teach the religion" is answered .by the Roman Catholics. The Cathol Church says we teach our children religion. That we mnv tench them on the. highest, nrin-

ciples of education we gather them into our schools. Our people are put to a test, a test of conscience "to stand by their conscience, their honor, their faith." They have.to pay taxation for a system that they hold is biassed against religion inasmuch as it does not acknowledge the teaching of the personality of God and His Christ, even

as shown by Bishop Butler already quoted. You say the Church must do it. They answer we do. Then why tax us. .What a scope for Dr Clifford and passive resistance if the taxation were direct as it is in England! And the Woman Catholic is only following the dictum as set forth in "Ecce Homo." Sneaking of the means used to develop Christian enthusiasm to the full, the author says:-—"Of these the most important is education inasmuch as it acts

upon tho human being"at an age when. he is more susceptible of all influences, ami particularly of moral ones, than he afterwards becomes; and it acts upon him incessantly, intensely anil by countless different methods for a series, 06 years. In good education there is moral suasion delivered impressively bpcauso delivered to individuals arid at the moment when the need arises, while besides moral suasion other instruments are employed. Of these the principal is authority, a most potent and indispensable agent." The author continues on the same lines and shows "bow. the law brought men to Christ, and what the law did for the race the j schoolmaster does for the individual." Summing up, he says:—"There is" no moral influence in the world, excepting that occasionally exerted by great'men, comparable to that of a good teacher; there, is no position in which a man's' merits considered as moral levers have so much nurchase. Therefore, the whole question of education—what the method of it should be, what men should be employed in it —is a question in which Christians are bound by their humanity to interest themselves." llore we have a reason for the Roman Catholic.position. It may be said that T am fighting for what most nations have thrown off. Tho Roman Catholics need no apologist. It is not because I love tbem the less, but that I love my own the more, and I feel if the ehnrches are to do what some say they must if religion is to be taught, the churches must have the children under their own teachers, even as it is in England, and as tho Catholic Church is doing here. Rave you any idea of the number ,pf children that attend the Church schools in England as against the Board schools ?

I hear the outcry, We not want denorcinationalism. No rnbre do I in the ordinary sense. Why is this cry? We had a hint on March 4th. Our cheques might go astray. We do not want to be ruled by the Church. No more do I. (A good example of what the minister can do is shown in "Strong Mac," by S. It. Crockett, or by the minister as shown by the life of Robert Dick, the naturalist. Ho is a very decent man to kow-tow to if one wants a billet and if he .has influence. But • keep him out of the school.) At present he would be a clever man at.travelling if he could enter every school in his parish during the course of a week. As I have already said, the cheque is a potent influence in fighting against religious teaching. The sense of liberty, the sense of safety, and the feeling of sureness in getting paid without the interference of jealous mortals made may acclaim with joy when they came under the 1877 Act. And the parents also welcomed.the sense of relief when the quarterly fees were 110 longer demanded. I know fully what it meant. My father' had twelve children, eleven of whom still live. Just fancy what an intensity of joy would come over those who, for conscience sake, still pay foes! 1 trust that the cheque will not only remain safe, but increase in size, and I am fighting to strengthen the free education of the colony of uniting all in the support of the teacher, and stopping for all time the bitterness and jealousy and suspicion that at present exist among the various Christian sects.

My remedy is a simple erne —perhaps you will say too Utopian. Once grant thit religious education is good, yoa must set about finding a means of giving it to all. How? Answer for yourselves. Here is mine: Let the Christian bodies be divided into two great bodies, for the, sake of convenience. I will give them the common names of Christian, Protestant and Catholic. I would set apart certain schools for the Roman Catholics, to which their children should go, and in which 'none but Roman Catholics should teach, the teachers of which schools should be paid at the same rate and in the same way as the teachers of the State schools. No fear of the cheque then. The teaches would be free from the interference of the Church in that matter. Other schools should be the Protestant schools, in which morality should be based on their accepted rule of faith, the Bible. From what I know of teachers as a whole, they would truthfully, sincerely and faithfully teach those truths upon which our common Christianity is built. I could amplify this, but time and space forbid, and I feel certain I would answer all objections. I have carefully followed all the arguments for the past thirty odd years, and, notwithstanding yon may say the man has a guid conceit of himself, I have not "met any that I have found unanswerable. "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of God," and it is our duty to find a means whereby our children shall be fortified by the truths of the Bible, even as our Lord Himself used them, so that each may use them to be delivered from evil."