BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 13427, 8 July 1914, Page 6

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS.

(To the Editor of the Herald.)

Sir, — I can assure Mr Rowley and Rev. P. J. Wain wright that 1 did not consider myself unfairly treated at the meeting of the Schools" Defence League on Friday night. Much as I should havo. liked to have pointed out what appeared to me the very misleading arguments m Rev. Mr Williams' lecture, I loyally accepted the ruling of the chair. These gentlemen now attack me (quite kindly) and both contend that where religions instruction is given m tho schools of any kind, the moral results have proved that it has not been to the advantage of the children. The obvious answer to this is: (1) How can you tabulate moral results? No statistics furnish more than a tithe of the moral effects of any teaching. (2) No une could say that "the moral standard m New South Wales would have been higher if there had been secular education, and certainly no one could prove that it would not have been lower. To say that the inculcation of religious ideals, with their insistence upon righteousness and purity, is likely' to produce moral results inferior to "those >f a secular system is a statement .which multitudes 'will find it impossible to belioye. It speaks well at least for niuch maligned New South Wales that it was possible to hod a large and enthusiastic meeting the other day m Sydney Town Hall m which ministers "-f_a.il denominations (including -Roman Catholics) met to consider how they could work together for the moral and social welfare of the city. Tliat does not look as' though the results of the religions system of education there had led only to bitterness and sectarian ! strife. I

The supporters of the Defence League seem to me, if they will allow me to say so, to take too narrow a view of the whole question. A generation "go a wave of secularism passed over '••he civilised world, due m part to the bewildering discoveries Of physical «cience. r Our secular systems of education were part of the' effects of this. But even a ' casual ' observer may notice that m the last decade there has been a reaction from the materialistic standpoint of those days, and the value of spiritual' realities is being recognised, by leaders of every branch of thought. Sir Michael Sadler, one of the most ex7'STienced edwda-tionn lists m England, f -he late Profersor James. Sir Oliver Lodge, and many others do not regard religion as an extra, or an unnecessary ippendage, but as a. vital part of true education. Tlie leading philosophers of the day, men like Bergson m France md Euchen m Germany, show the great '■-h'nngo from Mite pecular .standpointThe countries that thought secular education was the ideal a generation ago are no longer satisfied Trith it. Tliere is i growing feeling that something will have to be done. Why are so many of onr .school teachers blind to this trend of thought? The subject is one Which is worthy of calm and careful consideration, and prejudice, should not be allowed to blind reason.

'l'he Defence League fails entirely to J look at the question from the point ofi view of th-*- child. It .goes on the as- j sumption that if tho parents are. eare-i l«ss, then the children must be left to] themselves, and Mr Williams contend- j ■ a d that no child gthould be given any j religious knowledge unless the parent definitely asked for it. The Bible m ] Sohools League goes on the principle that there, is a duty owing to the child, however careless tlie parent is, and the more careless the parent, the more, t'he child needs outside help, and therefore «nly those children shomld be exempted from the scripture lessons whose parents con'jrientiouslv object. w'hieh is the only sound method, as such* parents are presumed to be the ones who will make some provision themselves. . I am asked, supposing the Roman Catholics were m a majority, would I ] then assent to the scheme thit is being m'ooosed. Of course T would, boca-ise ' should stilt have the same liberty that | I am now conceding to other-*. I have no more desire to tyrannise over majorities than I have over minorities, bub to be. impart-in l and fair to nil, as this scheme appear -t to me to be. — T am. etc., F. W. CHATTERTON.