A BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS MEETING.

Otago Witness, Issue 2665, 12 April 1905, Page 59

A BIBLE-IN-SCHOOLS MEETING.

Bx J. MacGkegok

The meeting held on Tuesday evening in the- Choral Hall had been advertised as a public meeting, and, on the assumption that all were invited, I attended, in order to satisfy myself as to the nature and prospects of the " movement," If movement it can be called that is destitute of vitality. The meeting could not be- described as either politjca.l or non-political, religious or non-r-eligioue, and yet it partook of both natures. It was presided over by a leading member of his Majesty's Opposition, who struck nic as being very uncomfortable and halfhearted ; it was opened with a neat little prayer by a leading lawyer, and with an official and somewhat perfunctory " benediction ' ' by one of the four clergymen on the platform ; indeed, this part of the performance seemed to have been almost forgotten ; but the " collection to defray expen&es " was not forgotten, and the result must have looked very slender and exiguous in the bottom of what was referred to as tho " empty tag." As for the audience, I did not count it. Not that this would have been difficult to do; and I know that it was done, and the count showed that the number did not exceed fifty! A public meeting in Duced'n, addressed by a leading politician and four ministers, on a most importaoit question, at which tho attendance did not exceed fifty ! Well might Mr Scorgie be reminded of the contrast between the present materialistic deadnesa and the intellectual life and moral earnestness «f 25 years ago. And yet the remarkable thing is that if one were to judge by appearances there are numerous agencies at work that pass for religious. Is it possible that they have as little real result as Bible-reading seems to have in New South Wales, even when Backed up with clerical religious instruction? And would the effect of the, mere reading- of Dr Gibb's lessons be any greater? Oh, that we could only clear our minds of^cant, and look fac. L s in the face!

I went tc the meeting 'fully expecting to find th& (comparatively small) hall filled w ith an audience comprising not only friends of the movement but also opponents such a-s myself; but, as far as I could judge, I was the only representatiA r e present of " th& enemies of the Bible," as the Outlook and Dr Gibb love to nickname us. The outlook from that platform must have- been d-epr-ess-ing in the extreme, especially to tho organiser. The audience seemed not only earnest, but even solemn, as befitted a semireligious referendum meeting, and the proba bilities are that it would have been as unanimous on tho question of no-license as it was en the Bible-in-schools. The only " good " meetlnsr the organiser has had "so far seems bo have been the Garrison Hall mee-ting ; and the fact of it having been held on a Sunday, when other amusements are not available, may perhaps suggest, to the organiser the advisaJileness of sticking to Sunday meetings. But he and his backers should give up reoeating the tale about the great body of feeling in favour of the scheme, for it is simply untrue. Apart from the remnant represented at tbe Choral Hall meeting, the great body of the people are indifferent. The "good" people, and even many of the goody people, aro intent mainly upon making the best of both worlds, especially this one.^ and the rest think of little el=e but getting' money in order to spend it on enjoyment. Bnt, whatever the causes, the task of the poor organiser mils 1 " ba- disheartening in the extreme: and, judging by his performance on Sunday o-venhig. he is very ill--uited for the work «f regenerating the community, and mv main object in writing is to state mv deliberate conviction that th& " movement " as now conducted must have a decided tendency to intensify rathei than to mitigate the evils ?o forcibly exposed and denounced by Mr Scorgie.

My special reference is to the sentiments expressed by the organiser in a short speech, in the course of which he undertook to dispose of the objections to Dr Gibb's scheme on the ground of the inevitable operation of the conscience clause as a r»li?iou= tost for teachers. Ho went on to relate the case of a newspaper editor of his acquaintance who. oa the parer chane'ina - hands, and likewise its politics, went on writing to order and decrying what he had been wont to praise, and vice versa. Mr Wright was so surprised at the conduct of the editor that he asked him to explain how he could act in such a manner ; and the answer he sot was l that he simply wrote professionally! Probably a gooel many in the audience expected, as I dkl. to Lea r rhe =poaker turn this oa s c o aocoi.nt for the pu^po-.f* of nisniiuUing tho effect, of hostile Dr-e^s criticism. But, instead of this, Mr Wright, to the surprise anel consternation o c se-teial of those who occupied =^ats on tho platform, pointed out. with an air of (rinmph. that the position of the teachers would be similar to that of this editor— th^y would teach the Bible lesson PBOFjsssiONALLT, although they might iiot

I believe what they taught, any more than I tho editor b-eli^ecl what he wrote ' After i tho meeting I oxpr^sed in s-trong terms to two of the ministexs my opinion of such teaching, and both were candid enough to admit that it was vory bad indeed."' One of them expressed his intention of pointing out to the organiser ins mistake, so that he should net repeat it. It matters little whether the organis-or repeats his argument or not. for tho «-euious thing is that a movempnt whose object is supposed to be tho elevation of the moral and religious tone of the community, should be entrusted to a man so lacking in moral son.-ibihty as to he utterly unconscious of the real drift of his, teaching, for I gather from the reports of previous meetings that ho must have taken the same line before. Insincerity* is the bane of our politics; it is not unknown in our pulpits, its prevalence in our congregations is a by-word, and now it is to be introduced into our schools! Introduced in the name of morality and religion ! The most effective lesson in morality is tho personality and example of the teacher ; youm? children are much quicker than adults in detecting anything in tho nature of insincerity, and the effect of it is to countervail any number of moral lessons, BihlicaL. or other. One of the clerical speakers gave the whole show away, however, when he argued that teachers who wore not prepared to teach what the State required them to teachmust give way to those who would! I had heard this argument used a little before by an enthusiast, in the audience but nothing short of the evidence of my senses could have convinced me that a minister would dare use it on a public platform On our school committees there are probably not a few men who would act on this principle, and in such hands a conscience clause would simply become a means by which many of the best and manliest of our teachers wouia be dr>'ven from the service to make way for— whom? Since the foregoing was written the minister who committed himself to this remarkable utterance has thought fit to repeat and amplify it. as if it were something tW be proud of. "I shall be glad to reeedv/ more Jight on the question." says the minister; but light" is not light to the blind or closed eye. One- wonders whether this minister had forgotten that the scheme which he is helping to promote purports to make provision tor a conscience clause for teachers." It is an essential part of the scheme, and not ' even Dr Gibb himself would have dared to advocate Bible-reading without such a clause for the simple reason that Parliament would "rT * 1S ™ to him if he did. Supposing that Dr Gibb. with the help of this minister succeeded m inducing Parliament to repeal those words in our law which make our education system secular, and to substitute this scheme with its conscience clause, would this minister consider himself justified in calluig upon a teacher, who in good faith availed himself of the conscience clause, to make way for another who was not' so scrupulous-? Or would he consider himself justified in helping to make it so hot for that -teacher that he must either stifle his conscience, or make way for another? If so, will he explain in what sense such, a "conscience clause" would be anything more than a sham and a snare? Would he consider that Parliament had been induced to enact his scheme by false pretences? Would he condescend to explain how a teacher, in availing himself of the conscience clause, would thereby be guilty of refusing to teach what the State and the people required him to teach, seeing that his engagement must necessarily be subject to the conscience clause? Would be consider himself justified, after having done his best to induce Parliament to adopt his scheme, in trying to reduce the conscience- clause to a nullity? If "Yes,"' could he still expect to be regarded as a preacher <>i righteousness and an example to his "flock" and the community? Would this preacher consider the teacher who, having conscientious soruples, suppressed them for fear of the eonsequenee3, a bettor man and teacher than one who in good faith availed himself of the conscience If Jio v-ill admit straight out that, ii his opinion, tho man who regards, say. the Genesis account of the creation, or the tower of "Bdbe-I, or the flood as legends or myths is unfit to bo a teacher, then we can at least understand his position, but we cannot understand what he means by his conscience clause. If he intends his clause to servo ihe purposes of a religious test, would it not be irvoro honest in call it by its proper nam-e? We Rational iste contend that no man, be ho minister of the Gospel or teacher, should be asked to teach anything that -he does not regard as undiluted truth, and that the crime of all crimes against the child-soul is the deliberate teachins; of lessons which the instructor knows or believes will have to be. amlearned. Wehave it on hi= own authority that Dr Gibb, if he had his way, would sweep all Rationalists and Secularists out of the country ; and apparently this backer of his is of the same mind. They are entitled to their opinion, but it is nci honest to provide a conscience clause for such people, and then force teacher 1 : who avail themselves of it to make nay for tho* 0 - who would teach whatever ihey aro rcquireel to teach, regardless of . tlitir ''convictions.' if such people can b& i c aid to have convictions. But such ideas nuiot be nonsense, for would they not empty j mo^t of our pulpits ! j It will be generally admitted that under J the Seddon regime humbug and insincerity ! have come to form tho dominant note in our politics, and there never was a greater piece of luimbug than the Premier's Referendum Bill. No one know* this better than Dr Gibb. and yet he did nis best to turn it to account for the furtherance of the scheme of his great "historical" conference : he not only supported the Premier's bill himself, but he actually induced the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church to commit itself to the advocacy of a bill which the members had nevor read. And ie va- d>iy when he- foaird thit the Premier :<rc! hU'siii,m bill wer^ not somcr to se.r\e his purpose that ho lun.ci round and denounced them. Anyone who knows aright nf tho political hi-tery < f Now Zpaland mu=t be "aware- of tho fact that this rcferen- ' dura try was a device hit upon about 15 years ago for tho purpose of enabling candidates to e-\ade an awkward question; ihey Mould not proimi-o to vote for a bill to ' i'lrrodiue Biblo-roadmg. bui they would ' -•lyvunr .i b'll ii to;p» •;'• - -, r .^.->- x - t' - 1 oople ! 1 hoy were nci. a-k-ed .n tho-t- i.Jty:wh^ther they would vote for a referendum, but whether they would votf* for Bibleroading. and "referendum" was the -evasive answer of the political shuffler. It has thefine democratic ring of what used to be Mr Seddon' s favourite oatch-word, "Trust tho people" ; and Dr Gibb, like the ecclesiastical Seddon he is (minus some of the re-

deeming featuree of the great original) realising the capabilities of the referendum >t> a shibboleth, has made it h's own. There in consists his great service to the eau=e to which he- had become a convert — that he realised the importance- of the vote of the shuffler and time-server, and the possibility of manufact iring them. This ]6 the real purpose of his organisation — the candidate who pronn«cs to for his referendum,, whether he behaves in :t or not, will get the support of Dr Gibb and his organisation ! And tins is the "platform" which the Dunedin Presbytery "heartily indorses"' ! And yet they expect people to heed them when they i^nounco the insincerity oi public life !