BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Otago Witness, Issue 4042, 1 September 1931, Page 9

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

AN INFLUENTIAL DEPUTATION PRIME MINISTER’S UNDERTAKING. WELLINGTON, August 27. An undertaking that the House of Representatives would be given every opportunity to consider the Religious Instruction in Public Schools Enabling Bill was given by the Prime Minister (Mr G. W. lorbes) when replying to a deputation iiom the Bible-in-Schools League, the 1 rotestant Churches, and several semi religious organisations which waited upon him this evening. The education system, Mr rorbes said, had always been the care of 1 arhament, and the question whether there should be any alteration had to be decided by the House. The deputation, which was introduced by fair James Allen, represented the Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist, Congregational, and Baptist Churches, the Salvation Army, the New Zealand Bible-m--bchools League, the New Zealand Council of Religious Education, the Y.M.C.A., the 1.W.C.A., the Mothers’ Union, the Auckland and Wellington Sunday School unions, the Young Men and Youno<X°,T- en ’ s TJilole Class Unions, and the Wellington Women’s Social Progress Movement. The deputation was also supported bv several teachers and educationists.

Archbishop Averill said the deputation was there to ask for such facilities as might be possible to enatile the Religious Instruction in Public Schools Enabling Bill to be considered by the House of Representatives. For over 50 years a majority of the taxpayers had been compelled to contribute to an educational system to which they conscientiously objected. If education were compulsory, surely the majority had rights, along with the minority; There was no desire to change the system for those who were satisfied with it. From his own experience—and he had been travelling up and down the country for very many years—he was convinced that any previous opposition on the part of the teachers had diminished very considerably. If the Bill were passed there would be no more expenditure involved than there was on the Nelson system. It was impossible for parents brought up under a secular system -to teach religion themselves. “ The present state of the world,” his Grace concluded, “ demands more and not less religion.”

Mr L. F. De Berry, headmaster of the Christchurch District High School, said that everj- writer on education systems, whether pagan or Christian, had included religion in some form or another as a vita] part of any complete system. “It has been said,” Mr De Berry stated, “ that the work of religious instruction is not work for the teachers, but should be reserved for him who is consecrated or ordaim’d. Here I desire to point out that the teaching profession is in a very special sense consecrated to the noble work it has undertaken. I believe that only those teachers who feel the call will undertake the work.” “ Is the Education Act of 1877, which excluded the teaching of religion in the primary schools, to throw its baneful shadow for all time? ” asked the next sp-aker, Miss Mary M‘Lean. of Wellfrigton. “The cry of sectarian dangers hag practically ceased, because everybody knows or can know that Bible teaching takes place in the secondary schools without any sectarian bias being given. It is a small minority that is obstructing progress and in a democratic country we should refuse to allow 6 o small a minority to decide so momentous a matter.”

“ If the Bill is passed not one penny piece of increased expenditure will be involved,” said the secretary of the B:ble-in-Schools League, the Rev. E. O. Blamires. The Bill had been so framed that the question of State aid was unaffected. I’he attitude of the Roman Cathoflc Church had opened up an opportunity for a statesmanlike move to settle a problem that had been a festering sore in the community.

The Prime Minister pointed out that the Bill was at present before a committee. He understood that evidence was being taken on it. The education system had been the care of the Parliament foi all time and the question whether there should be an alteration had to be decided by members of th ■ House. The question was not one that involved a party decision. It was a matter the House had to decide, and as Leader of the douse he would see that every opportunity was given for consideration of the Bill by members.