BIBLE TEACHING IN STATE SCHOOLS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 15196, 15 July 1911, Page 14

BIBLE TEACHING IN STATE SCHOOLS

AX UP-TO-DATE REVIEW AND APPEAL. By tlio Yen,' Arch-deacon- Wh.us, Cambridge. IV.— I TEE NEED FOR A CHANGE IN . - THE LAW. In tho tliml arliclo of tlm series _ J showed tho uselessness of tho present facilities for voluntary teaching in tho schools. Under those circumstancca if tho Biblo is to'bo taught thcro is nothing olso ito be dono but to ma ito a ohango in tho education law. Of course, there are objections mu'do to 4ho chansjo, but t.hcy are all easily answered. I will (alto a few of tho ob jeetions commonly raised, setting out what they o.ro as briefly as nossible, and then answering thorn in order. A GREAT VARIETY OP OBJECTIONS ai'e brought forward. It is said (1) that tho State should have nothing to do with teaching religion or the Bible; (2) that tho re-introduction of _ tlio Biblo would bo a return to denominational education; (3) that no chango should bo made until all parties aro agreed; (4) that a largo section, of the population, _ including many Roman Catholics, are ngamst it; (5) that, if tho State makes this concession to Protestants she must make some other to Roman Catholics; _ (6) that many parts of tlio Biblo aro unsuitablo for teaching to children; 17) that tho school syllabus is already ovcr-cro-.v-dcd, and there is no room to add anything more; (8) that many of tho teachers aro unbelievers, and would ridieulo the Bible, and thus defeat tho object desireel: and so ou But theso objections and mans others liavo been again and again ALL SATISFACTORILY ANSWERED. Tho answers may bo summarised as follows:—(To No. 1) [that tho State, having practically annihilated tho machinery that previously existed for teaching the Bible, ought in reason to sot up somo other in its place; (to No. •2) that tho exclusion of tho Biblo is a pandering to tho worst form of denominationalism. for it makes all tho people suffer to pleaso a comparative! v small section; (to No. 3) (that no law could ever ho amended if we had to wait for nil tho people to voto for tlio amendment; (to No. 4) that thoso who object to tho proposal would bo protected by a conscience clause, and bo free to withdraw from Bible teaching; (to No. 5) that tho Biblo is tho chief basis of teaching of Roman Catholics as woll as Protestants, and in teaching it there is no advantage given to ono Christian body more than ito another; (to No. 6) that only passages suitablo for teaching to children should bo used, and that various compilations with ithis obiect in view have been made; (to No. 7) that, if tho school syllabus is already full it is a simple matter to re-arrango it. As to tho last objection 'Vo. 8) that teachers would ridicule the Biblo, it is a gratuitous assumption, and a igrof.s ljbol which is unworthy of notice, and which should bo swept aside with indignation.

ANOTHER OBJECTION (which demands aparagrapn to itself) is that tho introduction of tlio Biblo into Ibo soiioal system would b:i tho death blow to the present excellent edueation law. The leasonablo answer to this, is that, ou the contrary, tho change would greatly strengthen the law, if only by stilling contro versy, and by supplying tho one great factor needed to nwlco tho New Zealand education '.aw eomploto

AND YET ANOTHER,

I must ask a little more spaco to deal with .in objection by tho supporters of what is called tho "Nelson" system. Under tlhia system teaching by ministers of re'igion and others is permitted by soino boards ami committees during school hours; and this is said to meet all rcjjuircinonts. That system, however, had its weaknesses exposed at (ho annual election of school committees last year. Although a praiseworthy effort was made to obtain for the "Nelson" system general support throughout tho Dominion, the effort resulted in lamentable failure. It met with stern opposition in many quarters, both from boards and committees.

Tins " NELSON" SYSTEM 1 poa-cssos, indeed, the one merit, where generally supported, of securing ; that some religious teaching shall he given during school hours. / It suffers, however, from two of tho greatest defects of tho New Zealand Education Law as a whole— namely, these: Firstly, that only a porlion of tho schools have any chance whatever of such teaching being given in tliem; and secondly, that those who have a chance are subject to a variety of treatment according to tho varying opinions of thrao who may bo in authority locally for tllic time being.,

ONE OTHER ANSWER: THE NEW SOUTH WALES SYSTEM

is more important Chan any answer -winch I have yet, given, because it is tho answer which incontrovertible silences all objections. The system which is hpro advocated is 110 theoretical idea, but ah asceitair.od fact. It has been at work in Nciv South Wales since 1866, in Tasmania sinoo 1868, in Western Australia sincc 1893, .and in Norfolk Island since 1806. Nono of tho terrible evils prophesied to coma to New Zealand, if tfio should adopt it, have so far conic to an,v of these Statffi or communities. The New South Wales system has, moreover, just commended itself lo t'he judgment of (lie people of another Australian State, and

THE VERDICT OF QUEENSLAND "was recorded in its favour by an immanscj majority of the people at the recent State referendum. The particular excellences cf tho New South Wales system I shall describe in my next article.